THE  PURITANS 


AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


THE 


•      PURITANS 


THEIR   PRINCIPLES 


BY 


EDWIN  HALL 


NEW  YORK: 
BAKER    AND    SCRIBNER, 


145   NASSAU    STREET. 


1846 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1846,  by 
BAKER  &  SCRIBNER, 

in  the  Clerk's  office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Southern  District  of 

New  York . 


I 


THE  following  Lectures  were  delivered  to  the  First  Congrega- 
tional Society  in  Norwalk,  Conn.,  in  the  latter  part  of  A.  D.  1843, 
and  early  in  1844.  They  are  designed  to  set  forth  the  causes  which 
brought  the  PILGRIMS  to  these  shores ;  to  exhibit  their  PRINCI- 
PLES ;  to  show  what  these  principles  are  worth,  and  what  it  cost 
to  maintain  them ;  to  vindicate  the  character  of  the  Puritans  from 
the  aspersions  which  have  been  cast  upon  them,  and  to  show  the 
PURITANIC  SYSTEM  OF  CHURCH  POLITY, — as  distinguished  from 
the  Prelatic, — broadly  and  solidly  based  on  the  Word  of  God  ; 
inseparable  from  religious  Purity  and  religious  Freedom  ;  and  of 
immense  permanent  importance  to  the  best  interests  of  mankind. 

In  accomplishing  this  design,  the  author  found  it  necessary 
to  enter,  to  some  extent  and  with  some  minuteness,  upon  the 
HISTORY  of  the  Puritans  and  of  their  times ;  to  trace  their  pro- 
gress from  the  discovery  of  one  important  principle  to  another ; 
to  exhibit  them  in  their  sufferings  ;  and  to  trace  the  Pilgrims  in 
their  wanderings,  to  their  landing  upon  these  then  desolate 
shores.  The  matter  of  CHURCH  POLITY  the  author  has  attempted 
to  discuss  in  its  fundamental  principles  as  well  as  in  its  particular 
details.  The  claims  of  PRELACY  he  has  endeavored  to  subject  to 
the  test  of  Reason,  of  History,  and  of  the  Word  of  God. 

In  the  whole,  the  author  has  endeavored  to  bring  together  mat- 
ters of  information  of  which  no  descendant  of  the  Puritans 
should  ever  be  ignorant,  and  of  which  an  adequate  knowledge 
can  scarcely  be  attained  at  present,  without  an  expenditure  for 
books,  and  a  labor  of  research,  beyond  the  means  and  leisure  of 
most  people  in  the  ordinary  walks  of  life. 

JANUARY,1846.  ^  g 


CONTENTS. 


I. 

PRELIMINARY  CONSIDERATIONS  :  ENGLAND  BEFORE  THE  TIMES  OF  WICKLIFFE. 

Importance  of  this  discussion  at  the  present  day.  Misconceptions 
concerning  the  Puritans.  Views  of  Hume.  Principles  not  to  be 
measured  by  the  occasion  which  calls  them  into  debate.  Princi- 
ples of  the  Puritans  not  to  be  appreciated  without  some  know- 
ledge of  their  times.  Plan  of  this  work.  England  before  the  times 
ofWickliffe,  .  \  .  .  *-.  .  .  .15 


n. 

WICKLIFFE  AND  HIS  TIMES. 

His  early  life,  and  writings.  Negotiation  with  Rome.  His  Prin- 
ciples :  Contrast  these  and  modern  Puseyism.  Persecution  of  his 
followers  for  a  succeeding  century,  .  .  .  .25 


III. 
REIGN  OF  KING  HENRY  VIII. 

The  King  and  Martin  Luther.  He  assumes  the  supremacy  of  the 
Church.  The  King's  Bible.  Articles.  "  Institution  of  a  Christian 
man."  "  Erudition  of  a  Christian  man."  Only  two  orders  of  the 
ministry  recognized  as  of  Divine  right,  in  the  days  of  Henry,  or 
in  the  succeeding  age.  Evidence  collected  by  Stillingfleet.  The 
bloody  statute.  Bible  forbidden.  Estimate  of  the  Reformation 
under  Henry,  ........  38 


Vlll  CONTENTS. 

IV. 

REIGN  OF  EDWARD  VI. 

Persecutions  stopped.  Doctrinal  disputes  revived.  Book  of  Homi- 
lies. First  service  book :  revised :  never  satisfactory  to  the  Re- 
formers. Supposed  necessity  of  forming  such  a  liturgy  as  to  keep 
the  Popish  people  in  the  Church.  Discrepancy  between  the  Arti- 
cles and  Offices.  Prayer-Book  an  equivocal  standard:  fairly 
quoted  by  each  of  two  irreconcileable  schemes.  The  question 
of  a  Liturgy.  No  right  anywhere  to  impose  one.  Imposed  not 
by  the  Church,  but  by  Parliament  and  Council.  Uniformity  en- 
forced. Reforming  the  Ordinal.  Rise  of  the  Puritans,  -  .  53 


V. 

REIGN  or  QUEEN  MARY. 

Her  Duplicity.  Restoration  of  Popery.  Re-ordination  of  Clergy- 
men ordained  by  King  Edward's  Book.  Kingdom  reconciled  to 
the  Pope.  Burning  of  the  Reformers.  A  Puritan  Church  discov- 
ered :  its  officers  burned.  Exiles  at  Frankfort,  .  .  .67 


VI. 

QUEEN  ELIZABETH. 

Reformation  conducted  on  principles  of  State  policy.  Papists  to 
be  kept  in  the  Church.  High  Commission.  Things  offensive  to 
Papists  stricken  out  of  the  Liturgy.  Plan  of  keeping  Papists  in 
the  Church  successful.  Foresight  of  the  Puritans.  Their  pre- 
dictions verified.  Original  complaints  of  the  Puritans.  Progress 
of  their  inquiries,  .......  77 


VII. 
THE  CONFLICT  OF  PRINCIPLE. 

Ultimate  scope  of  Puritanic  principles.  Means  employed  to  extermi- 
nate them.  Their  rapid  spread  :  nearly  prevail  in  Convocation. 
The  Puritans  ask  only  liberty  of  conscience.  Not  a  struggle  for 
political  power.  Remonstrances  of  the  Puritans.  The  separation 
begins.  Persecutions.  The  nation  roused,  .  .  .91 

I 


CONTENTS.  IX 

VIII. 

THE  PURITANS  SUFFERING. 

New  Canons.  Supplication  to  Parliament.  Cartwright  and  Whit- 
gift.  Private  press.  New  persecuting  act.  Brown  and  the 
Brownists.  Supplication  of  the  Deprived  Ministers.  Whitgift's 
inquisitorial  articles.  Martin  Mar-Prelate.  Act  against  separate 
Worship.  Sufferings  of  the  Puritans.  Their  touching  narra- 
tive. Roger  Ripon.  Barrowe.  Greenwood.  Penry,  .  .106 


IX. 

"  THE  JUDICIOUS  HOOKER." 

The  design  and  principles  of  his  Ecclesiastical  Polity.  Its  control- 
ling influence  over  the  dynasty  of  the  Stuarts.  These  principles 
examined.  His  doctrine.  His  notion  of  the  powers  of  orders,  .  124 

X. 

KING  JAMES  I.,  AND  THE  GOING  TO  HOLLAND. 

Change  of  James'  Principles  on  his  accession  to  the  English  throne. 
Hampton  Court  Conference.  Hundred  and  forty-one  Canons. 
Extra-judicial  decision  of  the  twelve  Judges.  Gathering  of  the 
Pilgrim  Church.  Flight  to  Holland,  .  .  .  .141 


XI. 

THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA 

Question  of  a  removal.  Meeting  for  deliberation.  Guiana.  Ap- 
plication to  the  King.  The  arrangements.  Farewell  meeting. 
Parting  at  .Delft-Haven.  The  Departure.  The  Mayflower  upon 
the  Ocean.  The  compact.  Provincetown  harbor.  Landing  at 
Plymouth,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .153 


XII. 
^^PHE  PILGRIMS  AT  PLYMOUTH. 

Apparent  designs  of  Providence.  Contrast  between  Popery  in  South 
America  and  Protestantism  in  the  North.  The  fruits  of  Puritanism* 
in  New  England.  Sufferings  of  the  Pilgrims.  The  first  harvest. 


CONTENTS. 


The  first  Thanksgiving.    New  settlers.    Famine.    Day  of  Fasting. 
Return  of  Plenty,        .  .  .  .  .  .  .166 


XIII. 

THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND. 

Vacillating  and  Irritating  Policy  of  James.  Sycophantic  bearing  of 
the  Bishops.  Passive  Obedience  and  Non-Resistance.  Attempts 
of  James  to  establish  Episcopacy  in  Scotland.  Assembly  of 
Perth.  Change  in  the  King's  Theology.  Original  Calvinism  of 
the  English  Church.  Lambeth  Articles.  Book  of  Sports.  Perfidy 
of  James,  ........  174 


XIV. 

REIGN  OF  CHARLES  I. 

Reaching  for  a  union  of  Churchmen  and  Papists.  Charles — his 
High-Church  and  High-Prerogative  notions.  Strafford.  Laud. 
Huguenots  of  Rochelle.  Book  of  the  King's  Chaplain.  King  and 
Commons  appeal  to  the  people.  Illegal  exactions.  The  Church 
Clergy  side  with  tyranny.  Overthrow  of  the  Constitution.  Cruel- 
ties of  Laud,  .  .  .  .187 


XV 

TIMES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD. 

King  and  Prelates  combine  against  the  liberties  of  the  People. 
Popish  ceremonies  and  utensils.  Images,  pictures  of  God,  the 
Father.  Communion  tables  turned  into  altars.  Natural  tendency 
of  prelatic  principles  to  corruption  and  persecution.  Their  fruit 
on  a  broad  scale,  and  for  a  thousand  years.  Original  idea  of  "  A 
Church  without  a  Bishop,  a  State  without  a  king,"  .  .  203 


XVI. 

REMOVALS  TO  AMERICA,  AND  FOUNDING  OF  THE  PURITAN  CHURCHES. 

Plymouth  a  few  years  after  its  settlement.     Plantation  at  Cape  Ann. 

Naumkeag.     Charlestown.     Fleet  and  Colony  of  1629.     Tolerant 

~>   •   spirit  of  the  Colonists.     Salem  Church.     The  Fleet  and  Colony  of 

1630.    Rapid  emigration.    Planting  of  the  New  England  Churches,    216 


CONTENTS. 


XVII. 

RISE  OF  THE  CIVIL  WARS.  » 

Charles  a  martyr  to  his  own  insincerity  and  crimes.  Attempts  to 
impose  a  Liturgy  upon  Scotland.  Uproar  in  St.  Giles'.  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant.  The  Episcopal  War.  Charles  forced  to 
call  a  Parliament.  Laud  impeached.  Divine  right  of  Episco- 
pacy discussed.  Smectymnuus.  Irish  Massacre.  Appeal  to 
Arms,  ........  229 


XVIII. 

THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OP  FAITH. 

Bishop  of  Connecticut  on  the  Rule  of  Faith.  "  The  Scriptures  as  in- 
terpreted by  the  first  two  centuries."  Dr.  Jarvis  extends  it  to  five 
centuries ;  others  to  seven ;  to  nine ;  to  eighteen.  Who  to  fix 
the  limit  ?  Who  to  declare  the  interpretation  ?  Absurdity  of  the 
rule.  No  stable  ground  between  Puritanism  and  Popery.  The 
Prayer-Book  as  the  interpretation  of  an  interpretation.  Impos- 
sible to  fix  the  standard  of  the  first  two  centuries.  Episcopalians, 
on  their  principles,  bound  to  fix  the  canons  of  the  Fathers,  and 
to  give  them  to  the  people.  Doctrine  of  the  Bishop  of  Connec- 
ticut contrasted  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Scriptures.  The  Bible 
alone  the  religion  of  Protestants,  .....  244 


XIX. 

ON  THE  ALLEGED  RIGHT  TO  IMPOSE  LlTURGIES   AND    CEREMONIES. 

Illustrated  by  the  Doctrines  of  Holy  Alliance.  Enormities  in  prac- 
tice. Necessarily  a  system  of  usurpation  and  persecution.  IJIa^^..^ 
tural  rights  of  Christian  congregations.  Plea  of  uniformity.  The 
question  not  of  the  expediency  of  a  Liturgy,  but  of  the  right  to 
impose  one.  Canons  of  American  Episcopacy.  Limits  of  Church 
power,  ........  \258 


XX. 

ON  SCHISM. 

Examination  of  the  grounds  on  which  the  Puritan  Churches  are 
charged  as  schismatical.  The  Prelatical  Doctrine  of  Schism  test- 
ed by  Scripture.  Singular  scheme  for  restoring  a  visible  Unity. 
Scriptural  view  of  Schism,  ,  .  .  .  .  .  270 


XU  CONTENTS. 

XXI. 

THE  CHURCH. 
b  NATIONAL,  PROVINCIAL  OR  DIOCESAN  CHURCH  RECOGNIZED  IN  THE 

NEW  TESTAMENT. 

The  Church  invisible;  partly  on  earth,  partly  in  heaven.  The 
Church  on  earth,  composed  of  all  Christ's  people,  in  all  com- 
munions ;  its  members  known  onry  to  God.  The  Church  as  com- 
posed of  visible  organizations.  No  National,  Provincial,  or  Dio- 
cesan organization  or  authority,  recognized  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Slater's  argument  concerning  the  Churches  of  Antioch 
and  Jerusalem,  answered  by  Scripture,  ....  281 


XXII. 

MATERIALS,  STRUCTURE  AND  DISCIPLINE  OF  A  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH. 
Scriptural  authority.    The    arrangements  of  Prelacy  contrary  to 
Scripture,         ........    289 


XXIII. 

'  THE  CHURCH,  AS  TO  EARTHLY  RULE,  A  REPUBLIC,  AND  NOT  A  MONARCHY. 
Observation  of  distinguished  Civilians.  Inseparable  connection  be- 
tween doctrine  and  the  genius  of  government.  Prelacy  incom- 
patible with  Christ's  injunctions.  Claim  of  Bishops  to  be  irre- 
sponsible sovereigns.  Republican  principles  recognized  by  the 
Apostles.  Popular  elections.  Mistake  with  regard  to  the  word 
Ordain,  .  .299 


XXIV. 

OFFICERS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Extraordinary  functions.  Men  called  to  a  special  work  Evan- 
gelists. Deacons.  Bishops.  Presbyters,  or  Pastors.  Singular 
error  of  the  Prayer-Book.  Apostles;  their  office;  requisite  en- 
dowments, .....  308 


XXV. 

APOSTLES  NO  SUCCESSORS. 

Argument  from  the  name.  Epaphroditus,  Andronicns,  Junia.  Ar- 
gument from  the  powers  exercised.  Bishop  Onderdonk's  argu- 
ment examined.  Laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery,  .  315 


CONTENTS.  Xiii 

XXVI. 

DIOCESAN  BISHOPS. 

Timothy  not  Diocesan  of  Ephesus.  The  Angels  of  the  Churches 
were  no  Diocesan  Bishops.  No  change  of  official  designation 
from  t  Apostle  to  Bishop,  ......  326 

XXVII. 
PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS,     .  333 

xxvni. 

INFERENTIAL  PRESUMPTIONS. 

High  Priests.  Priests  and  Levites.  Three  Orders.  The  Apostolic 
Commission.  Claims  of  Diocesans  to  be  Vicegerents  of  Jesus 
Christ,  .  .  .  .  .  .  .350 

XXIX. 

EPISCOPAL  EXCLUSIVENESS  —  ITS  BASIS    SUPERSTITION,    .  .  ,    359 

XXX. 

APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION,  CORRUPT  AS  A  DOCTRINE,  FALSE  IN  FACT,        .    371 


XXXI. 

ECONOMY  OF  CHURCH  GOVERNMENT. 

Ordination.  Headship  of  the  Church.  Episcopacy  and  Republi- 
canism. Episcopacy  in  the  American  Revolution.  Reproaches 
against  the  Puritans.  The  tables  turned.  Comparative  tenden- 
cies of  Puritanism  and  Prelacy.  Conclusion,  .  .  .  .  391 

APPENDIX,        .......  .421 

S 


PRELIMINARY   CONSIDERATIONS. 

Importance  of  this  discussion  at  the  present  day.  Misconceptions  con- 
cerning the  Puritans.  Views  of  Hume.  Principles  not  to  be  measured 
by  the  occasion  which  calls  them  into  debate.  Principles  of  the  Puri- 
tans not  to  be  appreciated  without  some  knowledge  of  their  times. 
Plan  of  this  work.  England  before  the  times  of  WicklifFe. 

THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES  : — the  permanent  im- 
portance of  those  Principles  to  Freedom,  to  true  Religion^  to 
the  present  and  the  eternal  interests  of  Mankind  !  To  those  who 
dwell  amid  the  graves  of  a  Puritan  ancestry,  these  are  subjects 
which  can  never  be  devoid  of  interest.  Nor  can  I  feel—believing 
as  I  do  that  to  the  principles  and  labors  of  these  ancestors,  under 
God,  we  owe  our  dearest  privileges — that  the  memory  of  such 
fathers  ought  ever  to  go  to  decay  among  their  children.  I  would 
that  no  one  of  our  sons  or  daughters  might  ever  be  able  to  visit  our 
ancient  burying  grounds,  without  feeling  the  blood  of  the  Puritans 
coursing  through  their  veins  with  honest  exultation ;  and  their 
souls  rising  to  God  with  heartfelt  gratitude  for  the  heritage  be- 
stowed upon  them,  through  the  faith  and  toils  of  such  an  ancestry. 

Such  a  discussion  is  the  more  important  at  the  present  day, 
when  so  many  seem  scarcely  to  know  what  freedom  is ;  and  so 
many  more  seem  not  to  know  ivhat  freedom  cost ;  and  still  more, 
as  if  unconscious  of  the  principles  from  which  freedom  sprung, 
are  ready  to  think  lightly  of  the  motives  and  wisdom  of  that 
noble  race  of  men,  by  whom,  amid  so  many  perils,  the  civil  and 
religious  rights  of  mankind  were  so  nobly  asserted  and 
maintained. 

There  is  further  occasion  for  such  a  discussion  at  the  present 
day,  when  the  character  of  the  Puritans  is,  in  certain  quarters,  so 
studiously  misrepresented,  and  their  principles  so  perseveringly 
assailed  ; — while  a  system  of  doctrine,  in  all  essential  respects 
identical  with  that  of  Popery,  is  so  fast  rising  and  spreading  in 
certain  quarters  of  the  Protestant  world  ;  and  while  the  system  of 
Prelacy  which,  for  a  thousand  years,  and  on  so  broad  a  scale, 
has  proved  itself  so  uncongenial  to  the  pure  Gospel  and  to  reli- 

184523 


16  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

gious  freedom,  is  now  putting  forth  its  claims  with  unwonted 
boldness,  and  in  the  most  exclusive  and  supercilious  form  ; — de- 
nouncing us  and  our  Puritan  Fathers  as  rebels  and  schismatics  ; 
our  churches  as  no  churches ;  our  ministers  as  sons  of  Korah 
Dathan  and  Abiram ;  and  all  people  who  do  not  submit  to  some 
Prelatical  Hierarchy,  as  out  of  the  pale  of  Gospel  grace,  and 
given  over,  like  heathen,  to  the  uncovenanted  mercies  of  God. 

The  principles  of  our  fathers  are  the  principles  of  truth  and 
freedom  :  as  important  now  as  they  were  in  the  days  of  primi- 
tive Puritanism.  They  are  to  be  maintained, — if  either  reli- 
gious truth  or  religious  freedom  is  worthy  to  be  maintained 
among  men.  The  conflicts  of  principle  at  the  present  day  are 
simply  the  old  conflicts  revived.  He  who  would  find  the  matters 
now  in  debate,  most  fully  set  forth,  and  most  amply  as  well  as 
most  ably  discussed,  has  only  to  review  the  productions  of  those 
ancient  times.  The  system  now  known  as  OXFORDISM,  or  Pu- 
SEYISM, — -which  many  advocates  of  Prelacy  affect  to  regard  as  one 
of  "  THE  NOVELTIES  WHICH  DISTURB  OUR  PEACE,"* — is  in  reality 
no  new  thing :  it  is  nothing  more  nor  less  than  that  compound  of 
Arminianism  and  Popery  into  which  the  English  Church  was 
fast  declining  in  the  days  of  "  the  judicious  Hooker ;"  which  had 
attained  its  maturity,  and  begun  to  develope  its  fruits  under  the 
auspices  of  the  persecuting  Laud  ;  and  which  was  again  rife  and 
rampant  in  the  days  of  Queen  Anne  and  George  I.  It  is  indeed 
the  genuine  Episcopacy  of  the  English  Church  in  its  palmiest 
days,  as  finally  fixed  and  established  under  Queen  Elizabeth ; 
and  thereunto  agree  the  Offices,  though  not  the  Articles  of  the 
English  Establishment.  If  there  is  any  difference  between  the 
system  of  those  days  and  modern  Puseyism,  it  is  not  in  fun- 
damental principles,  but  mainly  in  the  more  eager  reaching  forth 
of  Puseyism  towards  Rome ;  and  in  the  more  loving  tones  of 
endearment,  in  which  its  advocates  hail  as  a  true  Sister,  and 
even  as  a  Mother,  that  "  MYSTERY  OF  BABYLON  THE  GREAT," 
which  the  early  British  Reformers,  as  well  as  the  Puritans  and 
the  Bible,  abhorred  as  the  "  MOTHER  OF  HARLOTS,  AND  ABOMINA- 
TIONS OF  THE  EARTH." 

Some  have  conceived  of  the  old  Puritans  as  ignorant,  turbu- 
lent, bigoted  fanatics.  Others  have  conceived  of  them  as  men 
of  lofty  attachment  to  principle,  but  of  narrow  and  intolerant 
views :  men  of  truth  and  daring ;  men  who  feared  God,  and 
•who  had  tasted  deeply  of  the  powers  of  the  world  to  come, — 
but  unsocial,  all  made  up  of  sternness  and  gloom ;  men  whose 
austere  minds  were  never  unbent  in  hilarity,  and  whose  counte- 
nances were  never  lighted  up  by  a  smile.  Those  who  thus 
conceive  of  them  have  formed^thejr  conceptions  not  from  the 
•  The  Pamphlets  of  Bishop  Hopkins. 


I 

INTRODUCTORY.  17 

true  likeness  but  from  a  caricature.  Of  this  no  one  needs  any- 
thing more  to  convince  him,  than  to  take  up  what  writings 
left  us  of  John  Robinson,  the  Pastor  of  the  Pilgrim  Church  ;  of 
Cotton,  of  Owen ;  or  to  take  the  journals  of  Bradford,  or  Win- 
throp ;  or  the  works  of  John  Howe,  the  favorite  chaplain  of  Oliver 
Cromwell:  that  Howe,  from  whose  works  Robert  Hall  declared 
that  he  had  learned  more  than  from  any  other  man.  These  are 
not  the  productions  of  ignorant  illiberal  men.  Such  is  not  the 
food  that  ignorance,  or  fanaticism,  or  bigotry  feeds  upon. 

By  novelists  and  historians  the  Puritans  have  been  grossly  I 
caricatured.  How  easily  such  caricatures,  and  even  direct  false-  I 
hoods,  spread  and  gain  credence,  may  be  readily  understood  from 
the  errors  which  we  have  seen  spreading,  even  in  New  England, 
concerning  the  early  history  of  our  fathers.  How  many  people 
in  these  United  States,  and  even  here  in  our  midst,  confidently 
believe  that  the  famous  code  entitled  "  The  Blue  Laws  of  Con- 
necticut" once  had  a  place  among  the  statutes  of  this  colony? 
Yet  our  fathers  knew  nothing  about  them.  They  are  a  sheer 
fabrication,  for  which  the  world  is  indebted  to  "  Peters'  History 
of  Connecticut ;"  the  work  of  an  Episcopal  clergyman  of  this 
colony,  who,  in  the  beginning  of  the  Revolution,  sided  with  the 
enemies  of  his  country,  and  fled  from  the  indignation  of  his 
neighbors  to  England ;  where  he  employed  his  time  in  writing  a 
history,  so  full  of  gross  falsehoods,  that  the  greatest  charity  can 
imagine  nothing  better  in  its  defence  than  to  suppose  it  was  not 
intended  to  be  believed.  Yet  there  were  men  in  New  Haven, 
who,  as  late  as  the  year  1829,  published  an  edition  of  that  work, 
"  with  such  affirmation*  in  the  preface,  as  would  lead  all  who  are 
without  other  sources  of  information,  to  believe  that  what  it  con- 
tains, is  irrefragable  truth."* 

To  this  caricature  of  the  Puritans,  no  one  has  contributed 
more  effectually  than  the  historian  Hume.  He  spares  no  pains 
to  stigmatize  them  as  " zealots,"  whose  "principles"  appear  "fri* 
volous,"  and  whose  "  habits  "  were  "  ridiculous."  Yet  Hume  is 
compelled  to  declare, — what  the  course  of  history  would  have 
developed,  even  had  he  not  declared  it, — that  "  the  precious  spark 
of  liberty  had  been  kindled  by  the  Puritans  alone"  and  that  it  is 
to  them  that  "  the  English  owe  the  whole  freedom  of  their  consti- 
tution" With  regard  to  the  particular  events, — the  secondary 
causes,—- which  introduced  the  principles  of  freedom  into  the 
British  Constitution,— to  which,  in  spite  of  the  boasted  Magna 
Charta  of  King  John,  freedom  was  an  entire  stranger  up  to  the 
dynasty  of  the  Stuarts, — with  regard  to  these  secondary  causes, 
Hume  is  a  competent  judge.  But  Hume  was  a  cold-blooded 

*  See  Kingsley's  Historical  Discourse,  at  the  two  hundredth  anniversary  of  the 
settlement  of  New  Haven. 


18  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

infidel ;  peculiarly  bitter  against  Christianity  in  its  evangelical 
.-and  spiritual  form.     To  judge  of  the  principles  of  evangelical 

-  religion  as  distinguished  from  a  religion  of  superstitious  forms 

*  and  splendid  rituals,  Hume  was  not  competent.     He  could  never 
appreciate  the  motives  of  the  Puritans.     He  could  not  see  how 

I   the  principle  of  Justification  by  faith  alone,  by  bringing  every 
vsoul  for  himself  directly  to  God,  with  no  reliance  on  Priestly  inter- 

IventionS)  while  it  made  every  man  feel  his  responsibilities, 
made  him  also  aware  of  his  rights;  and  taught  him  to  shake  off 
j/the  despotism  of  a  priesthood  whose  claims  to  divine  authority 
Crested  in  sheer  falsehood.  He  could  not  see  how  this  dis- 
covery and  vindication  of  the  right  to  religious  freedom,  natu- 
rally led  to  the  discovery  of  man's  inalienable  civil  rights,  and 
gave  him  the  spirit  to  maintain  them.  He  could  not  appreciate 
the  principle  that  wrought  in  the  Puritans  ;  and  hence,  in  his 
view,  their  activity  was  turbulence,  their  firmness  wilfulness, 
their  zeal  for  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  oracles  of  God 
was  fanaticism.  Hume  saw  not  what  they  saw,— freedom,  pu- 
rity, truth,  the  vindication  of  the  religious  and  civil  rights  of  man, 
as  the  end  of  their  labors  aud  the  reward  of  their  perseverance. 

From  Hume's  sketch  of  the  Reformation,  and  his  delineation 
of  the  character  of  the  Puritans,  it  is  most  evident,  that  except 
the  incidental  bearing  upon  civil  laws  and  popular  freedom,  he 
saw  no  difference  between  the  superstitions  of  Popery,  and  the 
Reformed  religion.  With  him  religion  was  but  an  establishment : 
the  creation  of  popular  ignorance  and  credulity :  an  engine  of 
the  government,  to  be  moulded  by  the  civil  power  into  such  a 
form  as  to  render  it  most  subservient  to  purposes  of  state.  Hence 
he  praises  the  "  slow  steps  by  which  the  reformation  was  con- 
ducted in  England;"  he  extols  that  human  policy  by  which 
"  the  fabric  of  the  hierarchy  was  maintained  entire  ;  and  the  an- 
cient" (viz.  the  Papal)  "liturgy  was  preserved,  so  far  as  consis- 
tent with  the  new  principles :"  and  by  which  "  many  ceremonies 
become  venerable  from  age,  and  preceding  use,  were  retained." 
With  him,  the  only  question  is  that  of  human  expediency. 

(Whether  the  principles  of  the  Gospel  be  preserved  in  their  pu- 
rity ;  whether  impositions  inconsistent  with  the  Gospel  be  laid 
aside  ;  whether  the  Church  of  God  shall  be  severed  from  the  domi- 
nation of  mere  worldly  politicians;  whether  the  Gospel  and 
its  ordinances,  given  by  the  toils  and  blood  of  the  Son  of  God, 
shall  be  left  as  he  gave  them,  pure  and  simple,  with  power  to  se- 
cure the  great  ends  for  which  they  were  given,  rather  than  so  per- 
verted and  disguised  as  to  lull  men  into  a  false  security  ; — these 
are  matters  for  which  Hume  cares  not,  and  concerning  which  he 
makes  no  inquiry.  Concerning  the  Reformation  itself,  he  rejoices 
that  "  the  new  religion,  by  mitigating  the  genius  of  the  ancient 


INTRODUCTORY.  19 

superstition,  and  rendering  it  more  compatible  with  the  peace 
and  interests  of  society,  had  preserved  that  happy  medium  which 
wise  men  have  always  sought,  and  which  the  people  have  so 
seldom  been  able  to  maintain."  Hence,  in  the  Puritans,  he  sees 
little  else  save  the  turbulent  zeal  of  ignorant  and  misguided  fa- 
natics ;  breaking  the  public  peace ;  disturbing  the  established 
order ;  shaking  the  foundations  of  civil  government ;  and  going 
to  the  dungeon  or  into  banishment,  in  their  mad  rage  against, 
what  he  styles,  "  inoffensive  observances,  surplices,  corner  caps, 
and  tippets."  If  from  such  a  mingling  of  the  elements  there 
comes  out  the  fair  product  of  human  liberty,  Hume  acknowledges 
the  fact,  but  he  accords  not  to  the  Puritans  the  praise.  Deep  and 
overwhelming  as  was  the  mass  of  superstitions  with  which  the 
Papal  Beast  had  loaded  Christianity  during  the  accumulating 
corruptions  of  a  thousand  years  of  darkness,  Hume  rejoices  that 
so  little  was  changed  ;  and  he  ascribes  it  to  "  the  spirit  of  contra- 
diction to  the  Romanists,  taking  place  in  this  one  instance  only 
universally  in  England?  that  the  altar  was  removed  from  the 
wall,  placed  in  the  middle  of  the  church,  and  was  thenceforward 
denominated  the  communion  table."  It  did  not  occur  to  Hume, 
or  he  considered  it  too  trifling  to  notice,  that  the  Popish  altar  was 
a  place  where  the  Priest  pretended  to  offer  up  a  propitiatory  sa- 
crifice ;  and  that  when  the  eyes  of  men  were  opened  to  this  hor- 
rid corruption,  which  in  effect  made  void  the  one  only  and  all 
sufficient  sacrifice  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  it  was  demanded,  of 
course,  that  the  altar  should  be  removed :  since  the  Gospel  now 
knows  no  Priest  nor  altar  nor  sacrifice.  The  simplest  lessons 
as  well  as  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  Gospel  demanded 
that  the  Priest  should  be  turned  into  a  simple  minister ;  the  altar 
into  a  communion  table;  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  into  simple  bread 
and  wine ;  the  symbols,  not  the  substance,  of  the  body  and  blood  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  It  was  on  this  principle,  that  when  the 
communion  table  was  afterwards  turned  again  into  an  altar  and 
placed  against  the  wall, — for  the  minister  once  more  to  seem  to 
act  the  part  of  a  priest,  officiating,  with  sacerdotal  interventions 
before  the  altar,  with  his  back  to  the  people,— it  was  throughout 
England  deemed  the  symbol  of  a  virtual  abandonment  of  the 
fundamental  doctrine  of  the  Reformation,  and  a  virtual  return  to 
popery.  Yet  so  far  is  Hume  from  caring  for  or  comprehending 
the  deep  principle  involved,  that  he  regrets  the  change  from  the 
Romish  forms,  and  can  ascribe  the  turning  of  the  altar  into  a 
communion  table  to  no  other  cause  than  "  the  spirit  of  contradic- 
tion to  the  Romanists !"  How  poorly  is  such  a  man  qualified  to 
judge  of  the  principles  of  the  Puritans  !  How  lamentable  that 
his  opinions  on  these  subjects  should  enstamp  themselves  on  so 


20  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

many  minds  ;  and  form,  with  scarcely  a  question  of  their  accu- 
racy, the  prevailing  sentiments  of  a  large  portion  of  the  world ! 

With  regard  to  the  true  source  of  English  liberty,  however, 
the  testimony  of  Hume  is  largely  corroborated  and  unquestion- 
able. Says  Lord  King,  "  By  the  independent  divines,  who  were 
his  instructors,  Locke  was  taught  those  principles  of  liberty, 
which  they  ivere  THE  FIRST  TO  DISCLOSE  TO  THE  WORLD.  As  for 
toleration,  or  any  true  notion  of  religious  liberty,  or  any  general 
freedom  of  conscience,  we  owe  them  not  in  the  least  degree  to 
what  is  called  the  Church  of  England.  On  the  contrary,  we  owe 
all  these  to  the  INDEPENDENTS  in  the  time  of  the  Commonwealth, 
and  to  Locke,  their  most  illustrious  and  enlightened  disciple." 
Lord  Brougham  speaks  also  of  the  Independents,  as  "  a  body 
of  men  to  be  held  in  lasting  veneration,  for  the  unshaken  forti- 
tude with  which,  at  all  times,  they  have  maintained  their  attach- 
ment to  civil  liberty ;  men  to  whose  ancestors  England  will 
ever  acknowledge  a  boundless  debt  of  gratitude,  as  long  as 
freedom  is  prized  among  us ;  for,"  he  continues,  "  I  fearlessly 
confess  it, — they,  with  whatever  ridicule  some  may  visit  their 
excesses,  or  with  whatever  blame  others ;  they,  with  the  zeal  of 
martyrs,  and  with  the  purity  of  early  Christians,  the  skill  and 
courage  of  the  most  renowned  warriors,  obtained  for  England 
the  free  constitution  which  she  enjoys." 

The  Puritans  have  been  blamed  as  contending  for  frivolous 
matters  ;  because  the  occasions  in  which  these  contests  originated, 
were  such  matters  as  the  imposition  of  an  ecclesiastical  habit,  a 
surplice,  a  tippet,  kneeling  at  communion,  or  the  use  of  the  ring 
in  marriage.  But  how  seldom  can  the  value  of  a  principle  be 
measured  by  the  occasion  which  calls  it  into  debate  ?  Should 
one  now  attempt  to  stigmatize  the  patriots  of  the  American 
Revolution  as  turbulent  fanatics,  because  they  took  the  field,  suf- 
fered their  sons  to  be  slaughtered,  their  land  to  be  wasted  and 
filled  with  smoking  ruins, — and  all  for  a  paltry  three-penny  tax 
on  a  pound  of  tea ;  how  inadequate  such  a  representation ! 
How  deceptive ;  how  entirely  removed  from  the  truth  !  Years 
of  oppression  had  preceded.  Multiplied  wrongs  had  been 
inflicted.  The  tax  on  tea  was  a  trifle  ;  the  principle  involved 
was  of  untold  importance  to  the  welfare  of  millions  yet  unborn, 
and  to  the  liberties  of  the  world.  It  was  no  quarrel  of  avarice 
or  ill-blood  on  the  part  of  our  fathers ;  but  a  war  of  principle ; 
whose  result  has  put  forward  the  dial  of  human  freedom  centu- 
ries in  advance  of  the  progress  of  ordinary  times. 

Such  was  the  cause  of  the  Puritans.  They  had  suffered 
grievous  and  indescribable  wrongs.  The  world  had  groaned 
under  a  spiritual  bondage  and  groped  in  spiritual  darkness, 
through  the  want  of  a  few  FIRST  PRINCIPLES  ;  whose  loss  or  un- 


INTRODUCTORY.  21 

checked  violation  results  necessarily  in  darkness  and  bondage. 
Bitter  was  the  cup  which  had  been  long  filling  up ;  the  last  drop 
made  it  overflow.  The  last  drop  was  the  occasion  on  which  the 
debate  aro»e ;  not  the  whole  matter  in  debate.  It  was  not  for  a 
cap  or  a  surplice ;  nor  yet  simply  against  a  liturgy,  or  a  hierar- 
chy, that  the  Puritans  contended ;  but  against  spiritual  corrup- 
tion and  despotism,  and  in  behalf  of  religion  herself,  pure  and 
simple,  as  she  came  from  heaven. 

But  if  the  matters  in  debate  were  indeed  indifferent,  or  of  small 
moment,  why  did  the  hierarchy  and  the  civil  power  empty  more 
than  half  the  pulpits  in  England,  and  send  men  and  women  and 
children  to  prison  or  into  banishment,  for  matters  of  mere  indif- 
ference ?  This  is  sheer  persecuting  tyranny.  If  the  things  in 
debate  were  indeed  indifferent,  why  did  they  impose  them  upon 
the  consciences  of  good  men  and  true  subjects  with  such  fearful 
rigors  ?  The  Puritans  did  not  deem  them  indifferent.  They 
never  admitted  that  they  were  contending  for  matters  of.  small 
moment ;  but  for  their  rights,  for  conscience,  for  the  truth ;  for 
their  country;  for  God. 

But  these  preliminary  matters  need  not  farther  occupy  our 
attention.  We  must  return  to  the  days  of  the  Puritans,  and 
dwell  among  them  ;  hearing  their  statements,  witnessing  their 
distresses,  observing  the  course  of  events ;  and  weighing,  as  we 
shall  be  able,  the  matters  that  pass  under  ourfreview. 

Justly  to  appreciate  these  things,  it  is  indispensable  that  we 
take  a  cursory  view  of  the  state  of  things  preceding  the  rise  of 
the  Puritans.  We  will  therefore,  in  this  chapter,  briefly  glance  at 
a  few  things  more  important  to  be  noticed  previous  to  the  dawn  of 
the  Reformation.  In  the  next,  we  will  review  the  life  and  times 
of  Wickliffe,  that  honored  father  no  less  of  Puritanism  than  of 
the  Reformation.  The  third  will  bring  us  to  the  beginning  of  the 
Reformation  under  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  The  fourth  will  de- 
velope  its  progress  under  Edward  VI.  This  brief  survey  com- 
plete, we  will  proceed  to  sketch  the  rise  of  Puritanism,  its  conflicts 
with  Prelatical  usurpations  and  oppressions,  till  we  cross  the  Atlan- 
tic and  land  with  the  Pilgrims  on  the  rock  of  Plymouth.  Then, 
leaving  the  Pilgrims  in  the  midst  of  these  labors,  we  will  return 
to  England,  and  observe  the  events  there  transpiring  under  the 
reign  of  James  and  the  elder  Charles  :  till  this  religious  contro* 
versy,  drawing  into  itself  the  great  questions  of  civil  liberty  and 
human  rights,  overturns  the  established  church  and  the  throne 
together ;  despoils  the  bishops  of  their  mitres,  and  brings  the  king 
to  the  scaffold.  A  rapid  glance  at  subsequent  events  will  bring 
us  to  the  questions  at  issue  between  Puritanism  and  Prelacy  at 
the  present  day ;  and  to  the  vindication  of  that  FAITH  and  ORDER, 
which,  in  common  with  our  Pilgrim  Fathers,  we  find  broadly 
and  solidly  based  on  the  Word  of  God. 


22  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

"  ENGLAND,"  says  Bishop  Burnet  in  his  History  of  the  Refor- 
mation, "  had  been  for  three  hundred  years  the  tamest  part  of  Chris- 
tendom to  the  Papal  authority,  and  had  been  accordingly  dealt 
with."  We  can  only  give  our  attention  to  one  or  two  of  the 
principal  events  which  contributed  to  give  the  Pope  such  resist- 
less sway  over  the  island  of  our  forefathers. 

William,  duke  of  Normandy,  surnamed  the  Conqueror,  in 
A.  D.,  1066,  obtained  the  crown  of  England  mainly  through  the 
favor  of  the  Pope ;  and  various  unusual  advantages  were  granted 
to  the  See  of  Rome  in  return.  Further  prerogatives  were  granted 
to  the  Popedom,  under  the  reign  of  that  weak  and  wicked  king 
John,)  who  took  possession  of  the  throne  A.  D.  1190.  John  quar- 
relling with  his  bishops,  the  Pope  took  occasion  to  interfere,  and 
appointed  on  his  own  authority  an  archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
John  refused  to  admit  the  Pope's  nomination,  and  the  Pope  put 
the  kingdom  under  an  interdict.  By  the  operation  of  that  inter- 
dict, "  The  nation  was  deprived  at  once  of  all  the  exterior  exer- 
cise of  its  religion.  The  altars  were  despoiled  of  their  ornaments ; 
the  crosses,  the  relics,  the  images  and  the  statues  of  the  saints^ 
were  laid  on  the  ground  :  and  as  if  the  air  itself  had  been  pro-% 
faned,  and  might  pollute  them  by  its  contact,  the  priests  carefully 
covered  them  up  even  from  their  own  approach  and  veneration. 
The  bells  were  removed  from  the  steeples  and  laid  on  the  ground." 
"  The  churches  wtre  shut.  The  dead  were  refused  Christian 
burial,  and  thrown  into  ditches  on  the  highways."  According 
to  the  belief  of  the  times,  the  nation  was  cut  oft'  from  God  and 
from  heaven.  No  courage  or  patriotism  could  give  any  man 
heart  to  meet  the  power  of  such  a  horrible  and  mysterious  curse. 
The  king  was  excommunicated  :  and  in  those  days  the  excom- 
municated person  lost  his  civil  rights,  and  was  accounted  not 
only  an  outlaw,  but  loathsome  and  accursed.  No  one,  as  he 
feared  the  like  sentence  upon  himself,  and  perdition  upon  his 
own  soul,  might  afford  him  a  shelter  or  do  him  a  kindness.  The 
subjects  of  John  were,  by  the  Pope,  absolved  from  their  alle- 
giance ;  and  the  kingdom  was  given  to  Philip,  king  of  France  ; 
who  was  required,  as  a  dutiful  son  of  the  church,  to  come  with 
an  army  and  enter  upon  the  possession. 

JOHN,  in  distress  and  terror,  submitted  to  the  Pope,  and  took 
an  oath  to  perform  whatever  stipulations  the  Pope  should  impose. 
Then  kneeling,  with  his  hands  held  between  the  hands  of  the 
legate,  and  under  his  dictation,  he  took  the  following  oath  :  "  I 
John,  by  the  grace  of  God,  King  of  England  and  Lord  of  Ire- 
land, in  order  to  expiate  my  sins,  from  my  own  free  will,  and 
advice  of  my  barons,  give  to  the  church  of  Rome,  to  Pope  Inno- 
cent and  his  successors,  the  kingdom  of  England,  and  all  other 
prerogatives  of  my  crown.  I  will  hereafter  hold  them  as  the 


INTRODUCTORY.  23 

Pope's  vassal.  I  will  be  faithful  to  God  and  to  the  church  of 
Rome ;  to  the  Pope  my  master,  and  his  successors  legitimately 
elected."  Having  done  homage  to  the  Pope's  legate,  and  re- 
instated the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  appointed  by  the  Pope, 
and  paid  tribute,  the  crown  was  restored  to  him,  while  the  legate 
trampled  the  tribute  money  under  his  feet." 

The  ecclesiastical  preferments  of  England  were  thus  given 
into  the  hands  of  the  Pope.  Foreigners  were  put  into  the  richest 
bishoprics  ;  and  enjoyed  their  revenues  without  residing  in  their 
dioceses,  or  so  much  as  setting  foot  on  English  ground.  Va- 
cant preferments  the  Pope  sold  for  the  benefit  of  his  own  coffers  ; 
nay,  without  waiting  for  the  death  of  the  incumbent,  he  made 
provisional  sales  of  dioceses,  parishes,  and  canonries,  to  any  who 
would  pay  his  price ;  who  were  thus  endowed  with  the  right  of 
succession  whenever  the  void  term  should  occur.  He  exacted 
the  revenues  of  all  vacant  benefices  ;  the  twentieth  of  all  ecclesi- 
astical revenues  whatever :  and  where  these  revenues  exceeded 
a  hundred  marks,  he  demanded  a  third :  of  the  benefices  of  non- 
residents he  exacted  one-half. 

A  century  and  more  passed  away  while  the  kingdom  was  suf- 
fering under  this  foreign  yoke  with  scarcely  a  hope  of  ever  finding 
relief.  At  length  the  sceptre  of  England  was  grasped  by  a  firmer 
and  more  sagacious  hand.  Edward  III,  A.  D.  1352,  ordained 
that  all  forestalling  of  benefices  should  cease :  that  the  elections, 
presentments,  and  collations,  should  stand  in  right  of  the  crown, 
or  of  any  of  his  majesty's  subjects,  notwithstanding  any  provisions 
from  Rome.  An  inquiry  directed  by  Parliament,  resulted  in  the 
discovery  that  more  than  half  the  landed  property  in  the  kingdom 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  clergy  :  that  the  most  lucrative  benefices 
were  in  the  possession  of  foreigners;  some  of  them  mere  boys, 
who  had  never  set  foot  on  English  soil :  that  the  collector  of 
Peter's  pence,  who  "  kept  a  house  in  London  with  clerks  and 
officers  thereunto  belonging,  transported  yearly  to  the  Pope  twenty 
thousand  marks,  and  most  commonly  more;"  that  other  foreign 
dignitaries,  holding  ecclesiastical  benefices  in  the  kingdom,  though 
residing  at  Rome,  received  an  equal  or  greater  sum  for  their  sine- 
cures ;  "that  the  tax  paid  to  the  Pope  for  ecclesiastical  dignities 
doth  amount  to  five  fold  as  much  as  the  tax  that  doth  appertain 
to  the  king  by  the  year,  of  this  whole  realm." 

By  the  energy  of  Edward  III,  the  evil  began  to  be  checked : 
it  was  not  cured.  All  trials  of  titles  to  the  right  of  presentations 
to  benefices  were  still  brought  into  the  Romish  courts  beyond 
sea ;  appointments  to  benefices  were  still  subject  to  the  confir- 
mation of  the  Pope ;  the  canons  and  constitutions  enacted  by 
the  clergy  convoked  without  the  king's  authority,  were  binding 
without  any  voice  of  the  king ;  so  that  the  ecclesiastical  power 


24  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

was  independent  of  the  civil  government,  and  had  authority  to 
oppress  the  people,  in  various  ways,  without  limit  or  redress. 

To  remedy  these  evils,  the  famous  statute,  whose  provisions 
are  commonly  referred  to  by  the  title  of  Premunire,  was  passed  in 
the  reign  of  Richard  II.  "  That  if  any  did  purchase  translations, 
benefices,  processes,  sentences  of  excommunications,  bulls,  or 
any  other  instruments  from  the  court  of  Rome,  against  the  king 
or  his  crown ;  or  whoever  brought  them  into  England,  or  did 
receive  or  execute  them,  they  were  declared  to  be  out  of  the 
king's  protection,  and  should  forfeit  their  goods  and  chattels, 
besides  enduring  further  processes  and  penalties,  at  the  discretion 
of  the  king  and  council." 

By  such  enactments  the  kingdom  was  in  a  measure  relieved 
from  the  extraordinary  impositions  laid  upon  it  under  the  hands 
of  William  the  Conqueror,  and  king  John.  In  other  respects, 
the  iron  hand  of  the  Papacy  still  lay  heavy  upon  England.  Ig- 
norance and  superstition  reigned.  Though  parts  of  the  Scripture 
had  been  translated  into  Anglo-Saxon,  a  few  rare  copies  of 
which  might  be  in  existence  among  the  rubbish  of  the  monaste- 
ries ;  no  Englishman  had  as  yet  possessed  the  Bible  in  his  native 
tongue.  Few  even  of  the  clergy  were  able  to  expound  the 
prayers  and  forms  of  divine  service,  which  were  all  in  Latin ; 
few  were  even  able  to  read.  Yet  their  power  over  the  supersti- 
tious feats  of  the  people  was  almost  without  limit.  Under  the 
dominion  of  ignorance  and  superstition,  oppressed  and  plundered 
by  a  rapacious  and  debauched  priesthood,  subject  to  a  govern- 
ment just  emerging  from  the  barbarous  feudal  system,  with  no 
knowledge  of  their  rights,  the  people  enjoyed  not  the  least  degree 
of  freedom  of  conscience,  and  scarcely  knew  anything  of  the 
security  of  just  and  equal  laws. 

It  was  in  the  midst  of  this  darkness  that  WICKLIFFE  arose, 
the  morning  star  of  the  Reformation. 


II. 


WICKLIFFE  AND  HIS  TIMES. 

His  early  Life  and  Writings.  Negotiation  with  Rome.  His  Principles  : 
Contrast  between  these  and  modern  Puseyism.  Persecution  of  his  fol- 
lowers for  a  succeeding  century. 

WICKLIFFE  was  a  child,  three  years  old,  when  Edward  III. 
ascended  the  throne,  A.  D.  1327.  He  lived,  therefore,  a  century 
and  a  half  before  Luther ;  and  died  A.  D.  1384,  or  108  years  be- 
fore the  discovery  of  America  by  Columbus. 

At  an  early  age  he  entered  the  University  at  Oxford,  where  he 
earned  the  name  of  a  hard  student  and  a  profound  scholar.  One 
of  his  bitterest  enemies  describe*d  him  as  "  second  to  none  in 
philosophy,  and  in  scholastic  discipline  altogether  incomparable." 
But  most  of  all  he  was  distinguished  for  his  early  and  profound 
acquaintance  with  the  Holy  Scriptures  ;  so  that  by  the  common 
consent  of  his  cotemporary  scholars  he  was  styled  "  the  Evan- 
gelical Doctor  ;"  a  rare  distinction  in  those  days  ;  and  one  which, 
if  conferred  on  a  man  of  inferior  genius  and  attainments,  would 
have  been  a  token  of  equivocal  praise,  or  even  of  contempt. 
Who  can  doubt  that  it  was  the  Bible  that  lighted  up  his  genius, 
and  that  gave  a  distinctness  and  vigor  to  the  productions  of  his 
pen,  which  rendered  them  the  wonder  of  that  age  ? 

Drinking  the  waters  of  Christianity  at  their  fountain,  the  Word 
of  God,  Wickliffe  saw  even  while  a  student,  the  gross  supersti- 
tion and  corruption  of  the  prevailing  religion.  What  he  saw  he 
dared  to  speak,  and  to  write  :  nor  did  he  hesitate  to  adapt  his 
writings  to  the  capacity  of  the  common  people ; — setting  forth 
the  way  of  holiness,  and  pointing  out  the  worldliness,  the  cor- 
ruptions, and  the  errors  of  those,  who  by  their  office  ought  to  be 
guides  and  ensamples  to  the  people,  in  the  way  of  life. 

Next,  he  set  himself  to  resist  the  imposition  of  the  "  Black 
Friar  Mendicants ;"  who  had  spread  themselves  over  the  king- 
dom,—absolving  the  sins  of  the  vilest  wretches  for  money,— 
usurping  the  offices  of  the  regular  clergy, — drawing  away  the 
youth  of  the  universities  to  their  monasteries  ;  and  who  thus, 
says  an  early  historian, — >"  By  their  numerous  arts  and  efforts  of 
lying  and  begging,  and  confessing ;  by  frightening  the  ignorant, 


26 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


and  flattering  the  rich,  succeeded, — in  twenty-four  years  from 
their  establishment  in  England, — in  piling  up  their  mansions  to 
a  royal  altitude." 

These  efforts  secured  for  Wickliffe  the  admiration  of  the  learn- 
ed, and  the  gratitude  of  his  country.  He  was  raised  to  the  war- 
dership  of  Baliol  College  ;  and  afterwards  to  that  of  Canterbury 
Hall.  But,  continuing  to  proclaim  the  Gospel  by  every  possible 
exertion  of  his  voice  and  his  pen,  he  was  soon  hurled  from  this  sta- 
tion by  the  mandate  of  the  Archbishop.  Yet  he  ceased  not  to 
preach  the  Gospel,  and  to  inveigh  against  the  prevailing  super- 
stitions and  vices  of  the  clergy. 

His  vigorous  writings  were  the  dawn  of  independence  as  well 
as  of  light  to  England.  To  these  it  was  owing,  that  the  public 
mind  had  become  so  far  disabused  with  regard  to  the  ghostly 
power  of  the  Pope,  that  the  king  and  parliament  ventured  to  in- 
quire how  far  the  Pope  might  bind  them,  under  penalty  of  perdi- 
tion, to  yield  to  his  enormous  exactions.  Wickliife  was  now 
summoned  by  name,  to  declare  whether  the  king  and  nation 
might  not  refuse  to  pay  the  odious  tribute  extorted  from  the  su- 
perstitious and  imbecile  King  John.  If  the  people  could  not  be 
so  far  enlightened  as  not  to  fear  the  interdicts  and  excommunica- 
tions of  the  Pope,  the  king  and  parliament  could  not  venture  to 
withhold  the  tribute,  without  certain  ruin.  Wickliffe  obeyed  the 
summons.  His  arguments  and  eloquence  prevailed.  The  tri- 
bute was  withheld. 

If  to  the  vigorous  and  politic  Edward  III.  the  praise  is  due  of 
beginning  to  wrest  the  kingdom  from  the  grasp  of  papal  power ; 
the  laws  by  which  this  was  effected  owed  their  existence  and 
efficiency  not  less  to  Wickliffe  than  to  the  king.  Edward's 
sword  and  sceptre  would  have  been  impotent  in  this  matter, 
without  the  pen  of  Wickliffe ;  nor  is  it  probable  that,  without 
this,  the  project  of  such  laws  would  ever  have  been  conceived. 
THE  BIBLE  EVEN  THEN,  CHAINED  AND  IMPRISONED  AS  IT  WAS,  WAS 
ENGLAND'S  BEST  FRIEND  :  nor  is  it  possible  that  the  Pope  should 
ever  cease  to  consider  it  his  deadliest  foe. 

Wickliffe  was  now  raised  to  the  chair  of  Theology  in  Oxford  ; 
where  he  shone  equally  the  learned  professor,  and, — to  borrow  a 
phrase  of  his  own, — the  diligent  teacher  "  of  simple  men  and 
women  "  in  the  "  way  to  heaven."  From  this  station  he  was 
called  into  the  public  service  of  his  country,  and  sent  by  the 
King  on  an  embassy  to  procure  from  the  Roman  Court  a  re- 
dress of  grievances.  Bruges  was  the  appointed  place  of  meet- 
ing. A  negotiation  with  the  Commissioners  of  the  Holy  See 
opened  the  eyes  of  Wickliffe  to  a  clearer  perception  of  the  deep 
iniquities  and  incurable  corruptions  of  the  whole  scheme  of 
popery.  He  returned  a  Reformer  in  earnest.  He  denied  the 


WICKLIFFE  AND   HIS   TIMES.  27 

Pope's  supremacy.  He  denied  his  infallibility.  He  denied  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation.  He  denied  that  the  Pope,  or  any 
other  prelate,  ought  to  have  prisons  for  the  punishment  of  offend- 
ers against  the  discipline  of  the  Church.  The  Pope  himself  he 
denounced  as  "  Antichrist, — the  proud  worldly  priest  of  Rome, 
— the  most  cursed  of  all  clippers  and  purse-cutters." 

Was  this  to  be  endured  ?  The  monks  drew  up  charges  of 
heresies,  extracted  from  his  writings,  and  sent  them  to  Rome. 
The  Pope  issued  his  bulls  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, — to 
the  King, — to  the  University, — calling  for  Wickliffe's  blood. 
All  was  in  commotion.  I  need  not  detail  the  means  by  which 
Divine  Providence  defended  the  life  of  the  Reformer :  till  hunt- 
ed, harassed, — and  still  continuing  his  labors  for  many  years, — 
he  came  at  last,  in  spite  of  all  his  enemies,  to  a  peaceful  end. 
After  his  return  from  Rome,  Wickliffe  descended  from  public 
life  into  the  retiracy  of  a  country  parson  ;  and  in  this  work  which, 
above  all  others,  his  soul  loved,  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his 
days. 

The  secret  of  Wickliffe's  power  lay  in  his  appeals  t^  thft  "Ri~  ^ 
ble.  Mighty  as  he  was  in  his  powers  of  logic  and  his  stores  of 
learning,  he  still  found  that  "  The  sword  of  the  Spirit  is  the  Word 
of  God."  This  was  his  theme  ;  this  was  his  authority  ;  this  was 
his  argument.  He  translated  it  into  the  English  tongue  :  and 
after  all  other  claims  have  been  discussed,  it  is  now  conceded,  that 
Wickliffe's  version  was  the  first  English  copy  of  the  entire  Word 
of  God.  Men  saw  now  not  only  the  corruptions  of  popery,  but 
of  their  own  hearts.  It  was  not  long  before  Wickliffe  had  many 
of  like  faith  and  spirit  whom  he  sent  forth  "  with  their  staff  in 
their  hands,  and  the  Word  of  God  in  their  bosoms,"  that  they 
might  make  known  everywhere  the  way  of  life,  and  preach  every 
where  that  men  should  repent.  Such  was  their  success,  that  the 
"ancient  chronicles  inform  us,  that  one  half  the  kingdom  in  a 
short  time  became  Lollards,  or  Wickliffites."* 

It  is  not  consistent  with  the  work  in  hand  to  pursue itjifi—pfijx 
sonal  history  of  Wickliffe  to  any  considerable  extent.  "Our  busi-  \ 
ness  is  with  his  principles,  and  with  the  result  of  his  labors,  as 
bearing  upon  the  history  and  principles  of  the  Puritans.  It  is 
sufficient  to  say,  that  Wickliffe  appears  to  have  been  a  very  de- 
vout and  holy  man  ; — ardent,  bold, — living  in  dark  and  danger- 
ous times, — and  but  a  man.  It  is  not  wonderful,  therefore,  if  he 
was  not  always  so  moderate  and  discreet  as  would  be  required 
if  he  were  to  be  judged  according  to  the  standard  of  more  peace- 
ful and  polished  times.  With  less  boldness  and  fire,  he  could 
not  have  done  the  work  of  a  reformer.  Self-denying,  humble, 
prayerful,  full  of  love  for  souls,  and  faithful  to  the  cause  of  Christ, 

*  Punchard. 


28  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

he  unquestionably  was.  Geoffrey  Chaucer^  the  father  of  Eng- 
lish poetry,  who  had  been  the  friend  and  fellow  student  of  Wick- 
liffe,  has  drawn  his  picture,  and  paid  a  tribute  to  his  memory  in 
the  following  description  of  a  parish  priest : 

"  A  good  man  there  was  of  religion, 
He  was  a  poor  parson  of  a  town, 
But  rich  he  was  of  holy  thought  and  werk, 
He  was  also  a  learned  man,  a  clerk, 
That  Christe's  Gospel  trewely  wolde  preche  j 
His  parishens  devoutly  wolde  tech, 
Benign  he  was,  and  wonder  diligent, 
And  in  adversitie  full  patient. 

#         *         #        * 

"  Wide  was  his  parish  and  houses  far  asunder, 
But  he  no  left  nought  for  no  rain  ne  thunder, 
Tn  sickness  and  in  mischeefe  to  visite, 
The  ferrest  in  his  parish,  moche  and  lite, 
Upon  his  fete,  and  in  his  hand  a  staff. 
But  if  were  any  person  obstinat, 
What  so  he  were  of  high  or  low  estat, 
Him  would  he  snibben  sharply  for  the  nones." 

Wickliffe  was,  in  the  true  sense,  a  Reformer.  He  traced  cor- 
ruptions to  their  sources :  he  pursued  abuses  back  to  the  princi- 
ple from  which  they  sprung.  He  aimed  not  at  lopping  off  now 
and  then  a  branch,  but  at  tearing  up  the  tree  of  evil  by  the  roots. 
He  aimed  at  laying  down  such  principles,  and  at  basing  his  re- 
form upon  such  grounds,  that  when  these  principles  were  once 
established  and  brought  into  successful  operation,  other  things 
would  follow  of  course,  and  the  work  of  reform  be  done.  Of 
his  work  it  might  be  said  as  of  that  of  John  the  Baptist ;  "  And 
now  the  axe  is  laid  at  the  foot  of  the  tree."  The  plan  of  Wick- 
liffe resembled  that  of  Luther,  rather  than  that  of  Erasmus.  Both 
these  men  were  learned  ;  both  saw  the  abuses  of  popery ;  both 
aimed  at  reformation.  But  Erasmus  looked  not  beyond  the  pre- 
sent abuses ;  he  saw  not  the  principle  from  which  they  sprung. 
Hence  he  began  to  wield  his  shafts  of  resistless  satire  against  the 
superstitions  of  the  people,  and  the  vices  of  the  monks.  Did  he 
accomplish  anything  ?  Certainly  he  did :  these  vices  and  su- 
perstitions received  a  momentary  check.  But  the  sources  re- 
mained ;  and  the  stream  of  evil  flowed  on.  Like  an  unskilful 
physician,  he  mistook  the  symptoms  for  the  disease  ;  and  ap- 
plying his  remedies  to  the  symptoms,  he  allowed  the  disease  to 
fasten  itself  irrecoverably  upon  the  constitution.  Luther's  plan 
was  different.  He  saw  the  vices  and  superstitions  that  prevail- 
ed, in  all  their  enormity.  But  he  saw  also  the  source  from  which 
these  disorders  sprung.  He  struck  at  the  source.  Justification  by 
faith  alone ;  no  purchased  indulgences ;  no  priestly  interventions 
and  absolutions  ;  no  reliance  on  'works  of  merit  or  of  penance  : — 
this  was  with  him  "  THE  ARTICLE  OF  A  STANDING  OR  FALLING 
CHURCH  ;"  and  this  doctrine  shakes  the  very  pillars  of  popery. 


WICKLIFFE    AND    HIS    TIMES.  29 

Superstitions,  vices,  abuses,  the  despotism  of  ghostly  power — 
give  way  before  it.     The  work  is  done  ;  there  is  a  reformation. 

Such  was  the  plan  of  Wickliffe.  The  senseless  superstitions, 
the  idolatrous  forms  which  Popery  had  substituted  for  Christian- 
ity, Wickliffe  saw ;  but  he  spent  not  his  strength  to  war  upon 
inferior  things.  Singling  out  the  fundamentals  of  the  Popish 
scheme,  he  laid  the  axe  at  its  colossal  pillars.  It  was  not  sim- 
ply to  purify  a  system,  in  its  very  foundation  and  principles  cor- 
rupt and  antichristian,  but  to  clear  away  its  very  foundations  ; 
and  to  build  up  true  religion  in  its  room.  There  was  no  great 
principle  of  the  Reformation  which  Wickliffe  did  not  see  and 
adopt.  With  the  Bible  in  his  hand,  and  taking  that  alone  for 
his  guide,  he  advanced  further  into  the  field  of  Apostolic  truth 
and  order,  than  Luther  and  his  immediate  coadjutors.  Wickliffe 
traced  up  his  principles  to  their  springs.  He  reached  hold  on 
the  results,  which  after  a  lapse  of  centuries,  and  after  an  age  of 
suffering  and  research,  the  Providence  of  God  unfolded  once 
more  to  the  eyes  of  the  Puritans.  p 

And  what  _W£r£_lhfise  principles  ?  THE  B^LE  ALONE,  irre- 
spective of  the  decrees,  or  traditions,  or  interpretations  of  the 
Church,  whether  by  prelates,  councils  or  fathers,  Wickliffe  main- 
tained to  be  the  SOLE  .RULE  OF  FAITH  AND  DUTY.  "  To  the  law 
and  to  the  testimony  "  as  to  the  ultimate  rule  and  arbiter,  he  direct- 
ed the  mind  of  every  man.  No  man  might  allow  the  priest  or 
the  Church  to  interpose  an  authoritative  interpretation :  PRIVATE 
JUDGMENT  was  more  than  a  right  :  it  was  an  indispensable  duty. 

CHRIST  ALONE,  he  acknowledged  THE  SOLE  HE.\D  AND  LAW- 
GIVER OF  THE  CHURCH  ;  affirming  that  "  No  true  man  will  ever 
dare  to  put  two  heads,  lest  the  Church  be  monstrous."  To  im- 
pose mystical  or  significant  ceremonies  of  human  invention  as, 
parts  of  religious  worship  was  sinful :  to  restrict  men  to  prescribed 
rituals  and  forms  of  prayer,  was  "  contrary  to  the  liberty  granted 
by  God." 

THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  he  defined  to  be  "  The  Congregation 
of  just  men,  for  whom  Christ  shed  his  blood  ;"  a  definition  which, 
instead  of  sweeping  a  parish  or  a  nation  into  one  indiscriminate 
society  falsely  called  "  The  Church,"  requires  the  Church  to  be 
limited  to  those  who,  professedly  and  apparently,  are  disciples 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

Of  the  RITE  OF  CONFIRMATION,  not  finding  it  in  the  Bible,  and 
seeing  its  baneful  results  in  augmenting  the  power  of  the  bish- 
ops, and  in  deluding  the  souls  of  the  people,  Wickliffe  hesitated 
not  to  declare  his  sentiments  in  the  following  terms :  u  The 
short  and  trifling  confirmation^  performed  by  the  Caesarean  prelates, 
together  with  its  pompous  mummery,  was  probably  introduced 
by  the  instigation  of  the  Devil,  for  deluding  people,  and  advanc- 
ing the  importance  and  dignity  of  the  Episcopal  order." 


30  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

As  to  THE  ORDERS  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  MINISTRY,  said  Wick- 
liffe,  "  there  were  BUT  TWO  species  of  orders,  namely,  that  of 
deacons  and  of  priests."  "  The  Church  militant,"  said  he,  "  ought 
not  to  be  burdened  with  three;  nor  is  there  any  ground  for  it." 
"  One  thing,"  says  he,  "  I  boldly  affirm :  that  in  the  primitive 
Church,  or  in  the  time  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  two  orders  of  clergy 
were  thought  sufficient ; — and  I  say  also  that  in  the  time  ol 
Paul,  a  Presbyter  and  a  Bishop  were  one  and  the  same ;  for  in 
those  times  the  distinct  orders  of  Pope,  Cardinals,  Patriarchs, 
Archbishops,  Bishops,  Archdeacons,  officials  and  deans,  were 
not  invented."  "  By  the  ordinance  of  Christ,"  said  Wickliffe, 
"  priests  and  bishops  were  all  one;  but  afterwards  the  Emperor 
made  bishops  lords,  and  priests  their  servants."  "  From  the 
faith  of  Scripture,  it  seems  sufficient  that  there  should  be  presby- 
ters and  deacons,  holding  the  state  which  Christ  assigned  them ; 
since  it  appears  that  all  other  orders  and  degrees  have  their  origin 
in  the  pride  of  Ccesar." 

Such  was  the  scheme  of  Church  polity  which  this  great  and 
good  and  most  learned  man  drew  from  the  Word  of  God.  A 
better  summary  of  the  principles  for  which  the  Puritans  contend- 
ed can  scarcely  be  given,  trustification  by  faith  alone,  the  fun-' 
damental  principle  of  the  Reformation ;  The  Bible  alone  the  rule 
of  faith  and  duty :  Christ  alone,  the  sole  lawgiver  of  his  Church  ; 
no  human  traditions  to  be  received  in  proof  for  matters  of  faith  ; 
no  human  inventions  to  be  imposed  as  essential  parts  of  divine 
worship  /-ptlrcse  were  the  original  principles  for  which  the  Puri- 
tans contended.  The  wrath  and  power  of  the  Hierarchy  coming 
down  upon  their  heads  for  these,  the  Puritans  were  at  length, 
like  Wickliffe,  led  to  inquire  into  the  foundations  of  the  Hierar- 
chy itself,  and  to  reject  it  as  unscriptural ;  a  usurpation  of  Christ's 
prerogatives  and  of  his  people's  rights. 

The  contest  on  the  first  part  of  these  principles  has  now  be- 
come the  great  theological  debate  of  the  present  day;  the 
Oxford  Tractarians  and  their  followers  taking  the  ground  of  old 
Rome,  in  favor  of  Tradition,  denying  the  right  of  private  judg- 
ment, and  teaching  the  efficacy  of  priestly  interventions  in  op- 
position to  justification  by  faith  alone ;  and  the  evangelical  party 
in  the  Episcopal  Church  fighting  over  again  the  battles  of  Wick- 
liffe, of  the  early  British  reformers,  and  of  the  Puritans.  The 
Bishops  of  Maryland,  New  Jersey  and  Connecticut,  have  flung 
their  banners  boldly  to  the  wind.  On  the  banner  of  the  Bishop 
of  Maryland,  as  it  floats  in  the  breeze,  you  shall  see  inscribed  in 
words  written  by  the  Bishop's  own  finger  : 

"Ministerial  intervention" — "THAT  SIN»  MAY  BE  FORGIVEN,  is 
the  essence  of  priesthood" 

"  Truth  has  been  obscured,  in  the  discussions  concerning  a 


WICKLIFFE    AND    HIS    TIMES.  31 

Christian  priesthood,  by  stopping  short  of  that  definition."  "  All 
the  forms  of  priesthood  that  the  world  has  ever  known  have  pro- 
pitiation for  their  end."  "  Why  should  the  administrator  of 
water  by  which  sins  are  luashed  away,  be  less  a  priest  than 
the  sprinkler  of  blood,  by  which  atonement  was  effected?"' 

Again,  as  the  waving  breeze  opens  another  fold  of  that  banner, 
you  shall  see  inscribed  there,  "  Rightly  interpreted  the  Bible  can 
only  be  in  and  by  the  Church.  Not  a  word  of  the  text  justifies 
an  individual  in  setting  up  his  private  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
as  the  rule  by  which  to  judge  his  preacher's  teaching."  "  The 
people  judges!"  "But  of  what?  Whether  he"  [the  priest] 
"is  to  teach?  Whether  he  teaches  the  truth?  of  neither." 

On  the  standard  of  Connecticut  Episcopacy  you  shall  see  it 
written  by  the  hand  of  the  Bishop  in  the  solemn  word  of  his 
charge;  "  The  Holy  Scriptures,  as  they  were  interpreted  by 
the  Church ;"  "  Our  book  of  Common  Prayer ;"  "  a  standard  of 
faith  and  worship."  "  Notions  of  the  right  of  priv ate  judgment !" 
— "  erroneous." 

As  the  waving  breeze  displays  other  folds  of  that  banner,  your 
eye  shall  catch,  at  various  glinlpses,  the  words  "  Dissenters"  — 
"  Dissenting  Press"— "Incongruous  Sects;" — "  Numerous  bodies 
of  intelligent,  humble  and  devoted  Christians,  but  without  any 
sufficient  bond  of  union  and  stability ;  the  Bible  alone,  to  the 
exclusion  of  all  church  authority;  the  Bible  alone,  without  note 
or  comment,  their  only  standard  of  faith  /"  "  Surrounded  by  all 
this  desolation  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country 
appears  as  an  oasis  in  the  desert." 

"  The  church  the  great  medium  of  communicating  divine  grace," 
"  The  Revelation  of  God  offers  salvation  only  through  the 
Church"  "  The  true  church  of  God  is  our  only  ark  of  safety." 

"  The  true  economy  of  the  Christian  religion  regards  men  as  by 

nature  the  children  of  wrath ;"  "  it  takes  them  from  this  state," 

"and   transfers  them  BY  BAPTISM,  into  the  family, 

household,  and  kingdom  of  the  Saviour."     *         *     «  Let  them 

be  assured,  that   those   who   are   sacramentally   baptized,"* 

*  "become  BY  THAT  ACT"  (not  in  name  only,  but  in 
deed  and  in  truth)  "  members  of  Christ,"  "  children  of  God," 
"  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  *  *  "  They  are  re- 
stored to  a  state  of  favor  with  God"  "  And  this  is  not  to  be 
regarded  as  a  mere  temporary  act,  but  as  the  initiation  into  an 
abiding  state."  *  "  The  first  sentiment  impressed  upon  their 
youthful  hearts  should  be,  that  they  ARE  IN  VERY  DEED, 
the  children  of  God ;  *  *  that  in  the  sacrament  of  Baptism 
they  received  the  spirit  of  adoption,"  by  which  they  are  enabled  to 

*  "  The  Priesthood  in  the  Church,"  by  W.  R.  Whittingham,  Bishop  of  Maryland, 


32  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

address  God  as  their  Father,  to  regard  Christ  as  their  Brother, 
as  well  as  Redeemer,  and  the  Holy  Ghost  as  their  in-dwelling 
companion  and  sanctifier."  * 

Turn  we  now  to  read  the  inscriptions  written  by  the  Bishop's 
finger  on  the  standard  of  New  Jersey  Episcopacy ;  and  here  we 
see  traced,  in  broad  and  legible  lines,  the  following  sentence  : 

"  The  true  Catholic  Pastor,  who  thus  receives  the  Word  of  God, 
with  the  transmitted  witness  of  the  CHURCH  ;  who  guides 
himself  by  the  Holy  Scriptures,  not  as  he  understands  them, 
but  as  Catholic  antiquity  has  revealed,  and  as  Catholic 
consent  has  kept  their  meaning ;  will  be  chastened  and  schooled 
by  the  submission  of  his  judgment  to  the  wise  and  good  of  every 
age,  into  the  child-like  spirit  which  God  will  bless." 

And  what  says  the  Bishop  of  Ohio  as  he  contemplates  these 
doctrines,  and  gazes  upon  these  unfurled  standards  ?  He  lifts 
up  his  warning  voice  in  solemn  tones  :  "  I  am  constrained  to  say 
that  every  further  step  has  produced  a  deeper  conviction  on  my 
mind,"  *  *  that  "it  is  a  systematic  abandonment  of  the 
vital  and  distinguishing  features  of  the  Protestant  faith; 
and  a  systematic  adoption  of  the  very  root  and  heart 
of  Romanism" 

"  A  Gambier  Romance,"  cries  the  editor  of  "  The  Churchman." 

"  Slight  shades  of  difference,  which  tincture  the  views  of  dif- 
ferent members  of  our  household  of  faith,"  re-echoes  the  Bishop 
of  Connecticut. 

There  is  one  man  more,  whose  name  is  as  familiar  in  our  Con- 
gregational and  Presbyterian  Churches  as  one  of  our  household 
words ;  an  aged  and  venerable  man,  whose  life  has  been  spent 
in  a  simple  and  faithful  testifying  of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus; 
and  who  is  now  ready  to  descend  into  the  grave,f  followed  by 
the  lamentation — "  My  father !  My  father ! "  by  thousands  of 
the  most  devoted  ministers  of  Christ  in  all  communions ;  an  able 
and  a  faithful  man  ;  a  scribe  well  instructed  in  the  law  of  God ; 
that  man  we  should  like  to  hear  if  it  may  be,  on  these  matters 
which  are  daily  growing  to  be  of  so  much  consequence  in  the 
Episcopal  Churches  both  of  England  and  in  the  United  States. 
What  says  the  venerable  DR.  MILNOR  of  the  system  of  doctrines 
emblazoned  on  these  unfurled  standards  ?  Let  us  hear  him  : 

"  When  I  can  bring  my  mind  to  believe,  that  instead  of  my 
Bible  as  the  guide  of  my  faith  I  am  bound  to  dishonor  this 
best  of  heaven's  gifts,  by  admitting  tradition  to  a  co-equal 
rank ;  *  *  *  when  my  charity  shall  so  fail  that  I  can  consign  my 
fellow  Christians  of  other  names,  whatever  be  the  strength  of  their 
faith  in  Christ,  and  the  holiness  of  their  lives,  to  the  uncovenant- 
e-d  mercies  of  God,  because  of  their  not  belonging  to  a  Church  gov- 

*  "  Charge  "  by  Rt.  Rev.  T.  C.  Brownell.  1843.        f  Since  deceased. 


WICKLIFFE  AND  HIS  TIMES.  33 

erned  by  bishops,  consecrated  by  succession  from  the  Apostles ; 
when  I  dare  assert  that  that  order  is  requisite,  not  only  to  the  per- 
fection and  completeness  of  a  Christian  Church,  but  to  its  very 
existence ;  when  I  am  convinced  that  I  must  ascribe  exclusively 
to  the  Apostolical  Commission,  the  derivation  of  the  grace  of 
the  Spirit  and  our  mystical  communion  with  Christ ;  to  believe 
the  truth  that  the  sacraments  of  the  Church  are  the  ONLY 
CHANNELS  whereby  the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  con- 
veyed to  men  *  *  *  when  I  can  be  so  presumptuous  as  to  claim,  as 
a  minister  of  Christ,  the  power  of  personally  absolving  indivi- 
duals from  their  sins.  *  *  *  When  I  can  make  these  admissions 
and  subscribe  these  sentiments,  I  may  join  the  ranks  of  the  men 
of  Oxford." 

It  is  most  obvious  that  the  debates  in  the  Episcopal  Church  at 
the  present  day,  are  but  the  revival  of  the  same  contest  which 
Wickliffe,  the  Reformers,  and  the  old  Puritans  maintained 
against  the  tenets  which  form  the  basis  of  the  Romish  apostasy. 
Is  the  Evangelical  system  of  faith,  in  opposition  to  the  Romish, 
consistent  with  the  Prelatical  claims?  Can  this  controversy  be 
long  maintained  without  drawing  into  question  the  Prelacy  itself, 
and  the  very  dogmas  concerning  ordination,  the  sacraments,  and 
apostolic  succession,  on  which  the  Prelatical  character  and 
claims  are  made  to  rest?  If  I  have  scanned  the  lessons  of  his- 
tory aright,  the  controversy,  which  is  now  rending  the  bowels  of 
the  Episcopal  Church,  is  soon  to  be  hushed  up ;  the  evangelical 
party  are  to  be  silent ;  and  the  whole  body  is  quietly  and  im- 
perceptibly to  yield  to  the  Tractarian  tendency  towards  Roman- 
ism ;  or  else  the  controversy  is  to  follow  in  the  track  of  the  same 
old  contest  in  the  days  of  Wickliffe  and  the  Puritans ;  and  Pre- 
lacy itself  is  to  be  called  in  question  in  the  end.  If  I  have  read  his- 
tory aright,  the  only  alternative  to  the  friends  of  Evangelical  truth 
in  that  communion  is,  either  finally  to  acquiesce  in  the  prevalence 
and  triumph  of  the  principles  which  they  now  denounce  as  "  the 
root  and  heart  of  Romanism,"  or  like  the  old  Puritans,  to  aban- 
don the  system  of  Prelacy  itself  and  come  out  from  the  midst  of 
her.  Of  the  reasons  for  these  conclusions,  you  shall  judge  in 
our  survey  of  the  course  which  this  same  controversy  has 
repeatedly  taken  in  days  of  old ;  and  of  the  principles  which 
must  ever  continue  to  turn  it  to  that  course.* 

Let  us  turn  from  this  digression.     While  Wickliffe  turned  his 

*  The  author  was  gratified,  some  months  after  the  delivery  of  this  lecture,  in  read- 
ing, in  the  New  Englander,  the  able  article  of  Mr.  Barnes,  on  "  The  position  of  the 
Evangelical  Party  in  the  Episcopal  Church"  in  which  he  discusses  the  question  so 
conclusively,  "  whether  the  objects  at  which  they  aim,  can  be  secured  in  that  com- 
munion ;  or  whether  they  do  not  necessarily  meet  with  obstructions  in  the  organi- 
zation  of  this  Episcopal  Church,  which  will  certainly  prevent  the  accomplishment 
of  those  objects." 

Since  that  time  we  have  seen  the  leaders  of  that  party  avow  themselves  deter- 
mined to  bring  the  question  to  an  issue  ;  and  declaring  themselves  ready  rather  to 

3 


34  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Let  us  turn  from  this  digression.  While  Wickliffe  turned  his 
artillery  against  the  mendicant  monks,  his  university,  the  regular 
clergy,  and  the  people  applauded.  While  he  stood  forth  the 
champion  of  his  country  against  the  exactions  of  the  Pope,  his 
king  and  the  parliament  sustained  him.  The  Pope,  indeed,  thun- 
dered out  his  anathemas,  and  denounced  his  death.  But  Wick- 
liffe found  those  who  were  able,  first  to  delay  his  trial,  and  after- 
wards to  protect  him.  But  when  Wickliffe  translated  the  Bible 
into  the  English  tongue ;  when  he  poured  the  light  of  heaven 
upon  the  thick  darkness  that  reigned  around  him;  when  the 
Romish  clergy  saw  their  superstitions  likely  to  be  undermined 
by  a  scheme  of  doctrine  whose  necessary  result  was  to  set  the 
consciences  of  men  free  from  the  domination  of  ghostly  power ; 
and  when  in  addition  to  all  this,  the  prelates  saw  that  the  very 
basis  of  their  prerogatives  was  likely  to  be  overthrown  and 
destroyed  ;  then  the  life  of  Wickliffe  was  indeed  in  danger.  The 
wrath  of  his  enemies  was  extreme ;  the  English  prelates,  the 
Pope,  the  priesthood,  and  the  civil  arm,  were  leagued  for  his 
destruction.  But,  with  a  series  of  remarkable  providences,  the 
Lord  watched  over  him,  till  on  the  last  day  of  A.D.  1384,  he  died 
in  peace. 

It  is  the  rejoicing  of  High  Churchmen,  that  England  was 
delivered  from  the  arm  of  Wickliffe,  even  though  it  was  only  to 
be  thrown,  for  more  than  another  hundred  years,  into  the  jaws  of 
the  Pope.  Says  one  of  them,  "  Had  Wickliffe  succeeded  in 
shaking  the  established  system  to  pieces,  one  can  scarcely  think, 
without  some  awful  misgivings,  of  the  fabric,  which,  under  his 
hand,  might  have  risen  out  of  the  ruins.  *  *  If  the  reformation  of 
our  Church  had  been  conducted  by  Wickliffe,  his  work,  in  all  pro- 
babilityr,  would  have  nearly  anticipated  the  labors  of  Calvin,  and 
the  Protestantism  of  England  might  have  pretty  closely  resembled 
the  Protestantism  of  Geneva  ;  Episcopal  government  might  have 
been  discarded  ;  *  *  *  the  clergy  might  have  been  consigned  to 
a  degrading  dependence  on  their  flocks."  "  Had  Wickliffe 
flourished  in  the  16th  century,  *  *  he  might  have  been  ready  to 
perish  in  the  gainsayings  of  such  men  as  Knox  and  Cartwrightj 
at  all  events,  it  must  be  confessed  that  there  is  a  marvellous  re- 
semblance between  the  Reformer  with  his  poor  itinerant  priests, 
and  at  least  the  better  part  of  the  Puritans  who  troubled  our  Israel 
in  the  days  of  Elizabeth  and  her  successors.  The  likeness  is  suf- 
ficiently striking,  almost  to  mark  him  out  as  their  prototype  and 
progenitor ;  and  therefore  it  is,  that  every  faithful  son  of  the 

submit  to  martyrdom,  than  to  the  prevalence  of  the  dogmas  which  they  oppose. 
But  the  General  Convention  has  met,  and  Puseyism  triumphs.  After  a  feeble 
struggle  the  contest  is  hushed.  So  much  is  settled  ;  that  no  effectual  resistance  to 
Puseyism  is  to  be  expected  in  that  communion. 


WICKLIFFE    AND    HIS    TIMES.  35 

Church  must  rejoice  with  trembling,  that  the  work  of  her  final 
deliverance  was  consigned  to  him."* 

We  accept  the  resemblance  ;    we  receive  Wickliffe  with  open 
arms,  and  gladly  enrol  him  among  the  ranks  of  our  ever  hoi 
fathers,  the  Puritans  of  old  England. 

At  Wickliffe's  death  the  art  of  printing  was  not  invented ;  nor 
was  it  yet  to  be  revealed  to  the  world  till  after  the  lapse  of  half  a 
century.  Wickliffe's  translation  existed  only  in  copies  written  out 
by  hand ;  and  yet,  in  his  lifetime,  they  multiplied  and  spread 
rapidly.  With  great  zeal,  the  Reformer  had  preached  and  pub- 
lished his  doctrines ;  having  sent  out,  besides  his  translation  of 
the  Bible,  nearly  two  hundred  volumes  from  his  indefatigable 
pen. 

These  were  now  condemned  as  heretical,  and  as  many  as 
could  be  found  were  committed  to  the  flames.  His  translation 
of  the  Word  of  God,  so  far  as  copies  could  be  discovered,  was 
also  consumed.  But  the  seed  was  sown,  and  would  continue  to 
spring  up.  Even  before  Wickliffe's  death,  a  law  was  passed, 
aimed  at  him  and  his  followers,  ordaining  "  That  all  who 
preached  without  license,  or  against  the  Catholic  faith,  should  be 
arrested  and  kept  in  prison  till  they  justified  themselves  according 
to  the  law  and  reason  of  holy  Church  /"  and  that  law  and  reason 
of  holy  Church  was  the  good  pleasure  of  the  bishop. 

Forty  years  after  the  death  of  Wickliffe,  his  bones  were,  by 
order  of  the  council  of  Constance,  taken  from  the  grave,  and  pub- 
licly committed  to  the  flames.  Still  the  seed  of  the  Reformation 
would  continue  to  spring  up.  Taught  by  the  writings  of  Wick- 
liffe, many  embraced  the  true  Gospel  in  England.  Copies  of  his 
writings  found  their  way  to  the  continent,  and  became  the  seeds 
of  a  rising  Reformation  there  ;  which  Rome  vainly  endeavored  to 
overwhelm  in  fire  and  blood. 

The  law  of  Richard  II.,  though  rigorously  enforced,  proved 
insufficient  to  suppress  the  rising  Reformation.  When  Richard 
was  deposed,  the  usurper,  Henry  IV.,  was  willing  to  do  the  en- 
raged ecclesiastics  a  further  pleasure.  In  the  second  year  of  his 
reign,  A.D.  1401,  it  was  enacted,  "  That  if  any  person  was  sus- 
pected of  heresy,  the  ordinary  [the  bishop,  or  the  one  having 
jurisdiction  in  his  stead]  might  detain  them  in  prison,  till  they 
were  canonically  purged,  or  did  ajpjure  their  errors  ;  provided 
that  the  proceedings  against  them  were  publicly  and  judicially 
ended  in  three  months.  If  they  were  convicted,  the  diocesan 
or  his  commissary  might  imprison  or  fine  them  at  discretion. 
Those  that  refused  to  abjure  their  errors,  or  after  abjuration  re- 
lapsed, were  to  be  delivered  over  to  the  secular  power ;  and  the 
mayors,  sheriffs,  or  bailiffs,  were  to  be  present,  if  required,  when 

*Le  Bas. 


36  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  bishop  or  his  commissary  passed  sentence ;  and  after  sen- 
tence they  were  to  receive  them,  and  in  some  high  place,  burn 
them  to  death  before  the  people" — (Neale.) 

"  By  this  law,"  says  Neale,  "  the  king's  subjects  were  put  from 
under  his  protection,  and  left  to  the  mercy  of  the  bishops  in 
their  spiritual  courts ;  and  might,  upon  suspicion  of  heresy,  be 
imprisoned  and  put  to  death,  without  presentment  or  trial  by  a 
jury,  as  is  the  practice  in  all  criminal  cases."  The  Bishop's  sus- 
picion stood  instead  of  an  indictment ;  the  bishop's  suspicion 
was  instead  of  proof,  unless  the  suspected  person  could  purge 
himself;  the  bishop's  judgment  was  the  sole  test  of  what  consti- 
tuted heresy  ;  he  was  accuser,  jury,  and  judge  ;  and  who  could 
stand  against  the  suspicious  displeasure  of  a  brutish  and  in- 
censed bishop  ? 

Nor  was  this  law  sufficient ;  for  in  the  beginning  of  the  reign 
of  Henry  V.  who  ascended  the  throne  A.D.  1413,  it  was  further 
enacted,  "  That  whosoever  they  were,  that  should  read  the  Scrip- 
tures in  the  mother  tongue,  they  should  forfeit  land,  cattle,  life,  and 
goods  from  their  heirs  for  ever,  and  be  considered  heretics  to 
God,  enemies  to  the  crown,  and  most  arrant  traitors  to  the  land." 

Such  was  the  state  of  religious  liberty  in  England,  in  the 
glorious  conquering  times  of  Henry  V.  Nor  were  these  laws 
left  to  be  a  mere  terror.  By  law  it  was  made  a  part  of  the  she- 
riff's oath,  "  that  he  would  seek  to  repress  all  errors  and  heresies, 
commonly  called  Lollards :"  "  and  it  is,"  says  Toulmin,  "  a  striking 
instance  of  the  permanent  footing  which  error  and  iniquity  gain 
when  once  established  by  law,  that  this  clause  was  preserved  in 
the  oath  long  after  the  Reformation,  even  to  the  1st  of  Charles  I., 
when  Sir  Edward  Coke,  on  being  appointed  sheriff  of  the  county 
of  Buckingham,  objected  to  it,  and  ever  since,  it  has  been  left 
out." 

The  wrongs  inflicted,  the  sufferings  endured  under  these  laws 
can  never  be  told.  There  were  no  historians  among  the  poor 
victims  of  these  oppressions  to  register  their  tears  and  to  chroni- 
cle the  months  of  their  imprisonment.  From  the  beginning  of 
these  persecutions  to  the  accession  of  Henry  VIIL,  a  century 
rolled  away.  The  witnesses  were  slain.  The  rising  light  was 
quenched  in  blood.  Darkness,  almost  unbroken,  reigned  once 
more  over  the  land.  Rome  and  the  Romish  clergy  of  England 
rejoiced  once  more  in  a  reign  unbroken  and  undisturbed. 

But  if  there  were  no  historians  to  chronicle  the  sufferings  of 
them  who  loved  the  Word  of  God,  the  public  records  tell  what 
public  records  may  disclose,  of  their  afflictions  even  unto  death. 
Hundreds  of  examples  are  on  record  in  which  men  and  women 
were,  on  suspicion  of  heresy,  seized,  imprisoned,  tortured,  buried 
in  their  dungeons,  or  given  to  the  flames. 


WICKLIFFE    AND    HIS    TIMES.  37 

We  pass  now  over  the  reign  of  five  kings,  occupying  the 
space  of  more  than  a  century ;  a  century  of  darkness,  supersti- 
tion, commotions,  and  blood :  but  days  of  fatness  and  rejoicing 
for  the  bishops  and  the  Pope.  We  come  to  the  times  of  Henry 
VIIL,  and  to  the  occurrences  of  his  eventful  reign : — we  come  to 
the  time  when  the  morning  star  of  the  Reformation  was  rising 
in  Germany,  in  the  beginning  of  the  16th  century.  The  art  of 
printing  had  now  been  invented ;  and  letters  were  reviving.  A 
new  world  had  just  been  discovered;  and  the  old  began  to 
awake  from  its  long  and  leaden  slumbers.  Men  began  to  think, 
to  inquire,  and  to  enter  upon  fields  of  new  and  startling  enterprise : 
sad  omens  for  the  reign  of  popish  superstition  and  intolerance. 
It  needed  only  that  the  Gospel  should  once  more  spring  to  light ; 
and  the  contest  must  commence  in  which  Rome  could  no  longer 
prove  victorious.  The  causes  of  that  long  night  of  ignorance 
and  superstition  were  sure  to  be  investigated.  The  sources  of 
spiritual  despotism  were  to  be  explored.  Lordly  prelates,  whose 
dominion  stood  in  usurpation  and  superstition,  would  be  sure  to 
resist  the  progress  of  popular  liberty ;  till,  in  the  course  of  that 
struggle,  their  own  claims  should  be  canvassed,  their  authority 
questioned  and  thrown  aside. 

Such  was  the  progress  of  light  and  freedom.  The  Reformers 
cast  off  the  doctrinal  errors  of  Popery.  Another  struggle  between 
prelatical  oppressions  and  usurpations  on  the  one  hand  and  the 
rights  of  conscience  on  the  other,  raised  up  the  Puritans.  The 
progress  of  their  principles  gave  to  England  whatever  of  freedom 
it  possesses  that  is  worthy  of  the  name ;  and  crossing  the  Atlan- 
tic, originated  the  institutions  of  our  own  happy  Republic. 


III. 


REIGN   OF   KING    HENRY   VIII. 

The  King  and  Martin  Luther.  He  assumes  the  Supremacy  of  the  Church. 
The  King's  Bible.  Articles.  "  Institution  of  a  Christian  man."  "  Eru- 
dition of  a  Christian  man."  Only  two  orders  of  the  ministry  recognized 
as  of  Divine  right,  in  the  days  of  Henry,  or  in  the  succeeding  age.  Evi- 
dence collected  by  Stillingfleet.  The  Bloody  Statute.  Bible  forbidden. 
Estimate  of  the  Reformation  under  Henry. 

THERE   was   still    subsisting  in  England,  much  of  the   leaven 
of  the  Reformation  infused  by  WicklifFe,  when  news  came  of  • 
similar  truths  breaking  forth  and  spreading  under  the  labors  of 
the  Reformers  in  Germany. 

To  the  spread  of  the  new  heresy,  or  rather  to  the  revival  of  the 
old  doctrine  of  WicklifFe,  King  Henry  VIII.  opposed  the  whole 
weight  of  his  absolute  power.  But  why  should  not  the  king, — 
who  had  been  bred  a  scholar,  and  who  had  already  been  flattered 
into  the  conceit  of  unequalled  abilities  and  learning; — why 
should  not  the  king  reap  also  some  glory  in  the  field  of  litera- 
ture and  theology  ?  He  descended  into  the  arena  to  break  a 
lance  with  the  great  Reformer  of  Wittemberg ;  whose  onset  no 
learning  of  the  doctors,  nor  even  the  thunders  of  the  Vatican,  had 
been  able  to  withstand. 

The  drama  of  the  Reformation  in  England  opened  by  a  book 
from  King  Henry  VIII.  in  defence  of  the  Seven  Sacraments  of 
the  Church,  against  the  heresies  of  Martin  Luther.  What  was  to 
be  expected  ?  The  book  was  lauded  as  the  perfection  of  wisdom, 
and  the  end  of  disputation.  "  Nor  was  it  a  performance,"  says 
Hume,  "  which,  if  allowance  be  made  for  the  age,  does  discredit 
to  his  capacity."  The  king  sent  a  copy  to  the  Pope,  "  who 
received  so  magnificent  a  present  with  great  testimony  of  regard," 
and  conferred  on  the  king  the  title  of  "  Defender  of  the  faith  ;" 
a  title  which  even  down  to  the  present  century,  the  Protestant 
sovereigns  of  England  continued  to  wear. 

But  what  cared  Luther  for  kingly  arguments  ?  The  might 
of  monarchs  lies  in  their  power  to  command, — in  their  armies 
and  fleets.  When  a  sovereign  descends  into  the  arena  of  intel- 
lectual strife,  he  comes  single-handed,  in  the  simple  strength  of 


REIGN    OF    KING    HENRY    VIII.  39 

an  individual  man.  No  long  time  was  required  to  bring  from 
Luther  an  answer  burning  with  the  fire  of  hot  controversy,  and  in 
no  manner  regardful  of  the  majesty  of  his  opponent ;  and  when 
did  an  advocate  of  Popery  come  off  from  a  contest  with  Martin 
Luther  unscathed  ? 

The  result  of  this  royal  controversy  was,  to  add  immense 
notoriety  to  the  Reformation  ;  and  immensely  to  accelerate  its 
progress.  The  king,  now  so  thoroughly  committed  to  the  cause 
of  Popery  by  having  written  a  book,  and  so  roughly  handled  and 
chagrined  in  his  contest  with  the  Reformer,  was  for  ever  fixed  in 
his  hatred  of  the  Reformation.  Accordingly  we  find,  that  the 
change  effected  in  ecclesiastical  affairs  under  Henry  was  less  a 
Reformation  than  a  revolution.  Henry  wrested  the  supremacy 
from  the  Pope ;  but  the  doctrines,  the  superstitions,  the  intolerance, 
the  cruelties  of  Popery  were  still  retained  in  all  their  vigor ; — 
save  as  some  changeable  hue  of  coloring  appeared  and  vanished 
with  some  new  and  uncertain  caprice  of  the  king.  England 
was  cut  loose  from  the  Pope  ;  but  the  papal  supremacy  and 
infallibility  were  transferred  to  the  head  of  Henry  and  hi$  suc- 
cessors. In  the  rites  of  the  church,  says  Bishop  Burnet,  "  The 
alterations  made  were  inconsiderable,  and  so  slight,  that  there 
was  no  need  of  reprinting  either  the  missals,  breviaries,  or  other 
offices." 

Let  us  briefly  review  the  leading  particulars  which  enter  into 
the  account;  and  mark  the  heads  of  the  causes  and  events 
which  detached  England  from  the  See  of  Rome. 

For  twenty  years  after  his  accession,  Henry  had  continued  a 
dutiful  son  of  the  Roman  Church.  He  had  even  suffered  the 
laws  to  slumber,  which  had  been  enacted  by  his  predecessors, 
against  procuring  provisions  and  bulls,  and  exercising  authority 
from  Rome.  With  his  favor  and  connivance,  Cardinal  Wolsey 
had  received  from  Rome,  and  had  long  exercised,  a  sovereign 
power  over  the  whole  clergy  and  church  of  England,  contrary  to 
the  statutes  of  the  realm.  The  king  had  added  to  these  powers 
by  giving  him  "  full  authority  to  dispose  of  all  ecclesiastical 
benefices  in  the  gift  of  the  crown,  with  a  visitorial  power  over 
monasteries  and  colleges,  and  all  his  clergy,  exempt  or  not 
exempt."  With  these  powers  a  new  court  of  justice  had  been 
erected,  called  the  Legatine  Court,  which  had  committed  num- 
berless rapines  and  extortions ;  all  which  doings  the  king  had 
connived  at,  out  of  favoritism  to  Wolsey  and  zeal  for  the 
Church. 

But  now  the  king  had  become  wearied  of  his  queen  Catha- 
rine ;  and  perhaps  he  sincerely  questioned  the  lawfulness  of  his 
marriage ;  as  had  already  been  done  by  many,  and  among  others, 
by  some  of  the  sovereigns  of  Europe.  Both  Wolsey  and  the 


40  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Pope  had  trifled  with  him,  and  delayed  him  for  six  years ;  and, 
out  of  purely  selfish  ends,  had  thwarted  his  desires.  By  other 
means,  which  it  is  not  to  the  purpose  here  to  relate,  Henry  ac- 
complished his  ends,  was  divorced  from  Catharine,  and  married 
to  Anne  Boleyn,  the  mother  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 

And  now  for  vengeance.  Wolsey  is  entrapped ;  having  exer- 
cised the  office  of  papal  legate,  contrary  to  the  statute  of  Richard 
II.  Henry  orders  his  attorney  general  to  put  in  an  information 
against  him  in  the  king's  bench ;  and  Wolsey  forfeits  goods  and 
chattels  to  the  king ;  is  put  from  under  the  king's  protection,  and 
becomes  an  outlaw.  Under  these  reverses,  the  haughty  cardi- 
nal sickens  and  dies.  And  now  for  the  Pope:  Henry  will 
snatch  away  his  supremacy,  make  himself  head  of  the  English 
Church,  and  stop  the  rivers  of  silver  and  gold  that  are  flowing 
from  England  to  Rome. 

How  can  this  be  done  ?  How  will  the  clergy,  so  devoted  to 
the  papal  See,  by  interest  and  superstition, — how  will  they  bear 
to  see  the  Pope  rejected  as  head  of  the  Church,  and  a  profane 
layman  installed  in  his  place  ?  In  this  way  :  the  clergy,  out  of 
reverence  to  the  Pope,— encouraged  by  the  king,  and  compelled 
by  Wolsey, — have  yielded  to  Wolsey's  legatine  authority, — con- 
trary to  the  statute : — and  have  incurred  the  pains  and  forfeitures 
of  a  premunire.  They  must  submit  to  the  king's  terms,  or  their 
vast  domains,  if  not  their  liberty  or  life,  must  pay  the  forfeit. 

The  king  assumes  the  supremacy  over  the  Church.  By  pro- 
clamation, he  forbids  all  persons  to  purchase  anything  at  Rome, 
under  the  severest  penalties.  As  he  expected,  the  clergy  begin 
to  rouse  themselves  up  for  resistance.  The  king  causes  an  in- 
dictment to  be  preferred  against  them  at  Westminster  Hall,  and 
obtains  judgment  under  the  statute  of  premunire;  whereby  the 
whole  body  of  the  clergy  have  forfeited  all  their  goods  and  chat- 
tels, and  are  out  of  the  king's  protection.  They  must  yield  either 
to  the  king  or  to  ruin.  They  buy  his  pardon  on  condition  of 
paying  into  his  treasury  an  immense  sum  of  money,  and  of  ac- 
knowledging the  king  as  sole  and  supreme  head  of  the  Church  of 
England;  yet  with  the  saving  clause,  "  so  far  as  is  agreeable  to 
the  laws  of  Christ."  But  what  was  this  saving  clause  when  the 
king  was  sole  judge  of  what  was  agreeable  to  the  laws  of 
Christ  ?  The  clause  itself  was  soon  thrown  aside,  and  the  king's 
supremacy  confirmed  by  parliament  and  convocation. 

And  what  was  this  supremacy  ?  First,  it  was  to  have  and  en- 
joy all  the  dignities,  immunities  and  commodities  which  had 
formerly  gone  to  the  Pope.  Secondly,  the  king  was  invested 
with  the  sole  power  of  establishing,  ordering  or  reforming  all 
things  connected  with  doctrine,  worship,  heresy  or  error.  What- 
ever power  had  been  usurped  by  synods,  councils  and  popes ; 


REIGN  OF  KING  HENRY  VIII.  41 

lordship  over  doctrine,  ceremonies,  worship ;  lordship  over  the 
interpretation  of  Scripture,  and  over  the  consciences  and  private 
judgment  of  all  men  in  the  realm  ; — all  was  given  into  the 
hands  of  the  king.  Such  was  the  tenor  of  the  Act  of  Supremacy 
passed  by  the  Parliament. 

The  Bishops  "  took  out  new  commissions  from  the  crown,  in 
which  all  their  episcopal  authority  was  expressly  affirmed  to  be 
derived  from  the  civil  magistrate,  and  to  be  entirely  dependent 
on  his  good  pleasure." 

A  new  oath  of  allegiance  was  imposed,  in  which  all  the  peo- 
ple were  made  to  swear  that  the  bishop  of  Rome  had  no  more 
power  than  any  other  bishop  in  his  diocese  ;  and  that  they  would 
submit  to  all  the  king's  laws,  notwithstanding  any  censures  from 
the  Pope. 

The  parochial  clergy  thus  submitting  to  the  king  were  taken 
into  favor.  But  England  was  full  of  monks ,  friars  and  monaste- 
ries^ possessed  of  vast  revenues  and  domains.  These  had  been 
in  great  measure  independent  both  of  the  bishops  and  the  civil 
power.  Their  sympathies  were  wholly  with  Rome.  The 
monks  and  friars  began  to  complain.  In  some  places  they  ex- 
cited the  people  to  insurrections,  and  endeavored  to  embroil  the 
affairs  of  the  kingdom  with  foreign  princes. 

The  king  knew  well  how  to  take  vengeance  on  these.  As 
head  of  the  Church  he  appoints  a  general  visitation  of  the  mon- 
asteries, and  commits  the  work  to  the  Lord  Cromwell  as  Visitor- 
General.  Several  abbots  and  priors  surrender  their  houses  into 
the  king's  hands.  Others  are  examined  ;  and  the  grossest  frauds, 
impostures,  and  debaucheries,  are  brought  to  light.  Their  pre- 
tended relics  are  exposed  and  destroyed.  These  were  innumera- 
ble ;  among  others,  "  The  Virgin  Mary's  milk,  showed  in  eight 
places ;  the  coals  that  roasted  St.  Lawrence ;  one  wing  of  the 
angel  that  brought  over  the  head  of  the  spear  that  pierced  the 
Saviour's  side ;  the  rood  of  grace,  so  contrived  by  springs  and 
pulleys  that  the  lips  might  move  upon  occasion."  The  images 
of  a  great  many  pretended  saints  were  taken  down  and  burnt ; 
and  all  the  rich  offerings  made  at  their  shrines,  seized  for  the 
crown.  The  lesser  monasteries,  to  the  number  of  two  hundred,' 
were  suppressed.  The  greater  monasteries  soon  shared  their 
fate. 

While  Henry  was  busied  in  transferring  to  himself  the  supre- 
macy and  emoluments  of  the  Pope,  the  doctrines  of  the  Reform- 
ation were  taking  root  in  England.  The  dungeon  and  the 
faggot  were  the  arguments  on  which  the  Sing  and  prelates 
relied  for  putting  down  the  rising  heresy.  Some  were  cited  into 
the  bishops'  courts  for  teaching  their  children  the  Lord's  prayer 
in  English ;  some  for  reading  forbidden  books ;  some  for  not 


42  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

coming  to  confession  and  mass ;  some  for  not  observing  the 
Church  fasts.  Of  these,  many  through  the  fear  of  death  did  pen- 
ance and  were  dismissed.  But  such  as  refused  to  abjure,  or 
after  abjuration  relapsed,  were  burnt  at  the  stake.  Many  fled 
into  foreign  lands.  Among  these  was  Tyndal,  who,  with  others, 
took  refuge  at  Antwerp.  These  men  employed  the  pen  and 
the  press  in  exposing  the  corruptions  of  Rome.  They  wrote 
against  images,  relics,  and  pilgrimages.  They  insisted  on.  justi- 
fication by  faith  alone,  in  opposition  to  justification  by  priestly 
absolutions,  penances,  fasts,  flagellations,  donations  to  churches, 
and  other  works  to  merit  the  divine  favor.  Their  books 
came  to  England,  and  made  converts  everywhere.  But  the 
mightiest  engine  of  the  Reformers  was  TyndaVs  translation  of  the 
New  Testament,  printed  at  Antwerp,  A.  D.  1527. 

Against  this  translation  the  king  and  bishops  were  incensed 
to  the  utmost.  While  others  are  spending  their  rage  in  deeds 
of  violence,  Tonstal,  bishop  of  London,  must  needs  try  his  hand 
at  a  stroke  of  policy.  He  gives  secret  orders  to  buy  up  all  the 
copies  that  can  be  found  at  Antwerp ;  and  collecting  a  vast 
number,  burns  them  publicly  at  Cheapside.  A  fine  device, 
truly,  to  stop  the  press  by  buying  up  its  productions!  The  first 
edition  was  marred  with  many  inaccuracies,  which  Tyndal 
longed  to  correct ;  but  he  was  too  poor  to  throw  aside  the  first 
edition  and  print  another.  What  better  service  could  the  bishop 
of  London  perform,  than  to  buy  up  the  whole  and  burn  them  ; 
and  thus  furnish  the  Reformer  with  funds  to  print  more  and 
better  ? 

The  burning  of  the  Bibles  shocked  the  minds  of  the  common 
people.  They  could  not  understand  the  righteousness  of  burn- 
ing the  Word  of  God.  The  Reformation  spread  the  more 
rapidly ;  the  prisons  became  more  crowded ;  the  fires  burnt  with 
greater  frequency. 

The  whole  Bible  was  translated  by  Tyndal,  assisted  by  Miles 
Coverdale  and  by  John  Rogers,  the  first  martyr  of  Queen  Mary's 
reign.  This  was  printed  at  Hamburg  in  1532;  and  greatly 
.helped  to  press  forward  the  swelling  tide  of  the  Reformation. 
At  length,  so  great  was  the  progress  of  popular  sentiment,  and 
such  the  genial  influence  of  Cranmer  upon  the  bigoted  king, 
that  the  Convocation  debated  the  question  of  translating  the 
Bible,  and  allowing  it  to  be  read  in  the  vulgar  tongue.  The 
majority  of  the  clergy  were  opposed  to  it ;  and  their  arguments, 
says  Hume,  wou^l  probably  have  prevailed  in  the  Convocation, 
had  it  not  been  for  the  authority  of  Cranmer,  Latimer,  and  some 
other  bishops,  who  were  supposed  to  speak  the  king's  sense  of 
the  matter. 

Tyndal,  the  Translator,  had  now  been  put  to  death  as  a  heretic 


REIGN  OF  KING  HENRY  VIII.  43 

• 

for  his  agency  in  that  work.  His  Bible  had  been  proscribed,  and 
men  burned  for  reading  it.  But  Cranmer,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, now  took  the  translation  of  Tyndal,  and  revising  it,  leaving 
out  the  prologue  and  notes,  and  adding  a  preface  of  his  own,  set 
it  forth  as  a  true  translation  of  the  Word  of  God. 

In  A.D.  1538,  the  work  was  printed  at  Paris.  The  king  would 
only  allow  copies  of  it  to  be  deposited  in  some  parish  churches, 
where  they  were  fastened  by  chains.  And  he  took  care  to  inform 
the  people  by  proclamation,  "  That  his  indulgence  was  not  the 
effect  of  his  duty,  but  of  his  goodness  and  his  liberality  to  them, 
who  should  therefore  use  it  moderately,  for  the  increase  of  virtue, 
not  of  strife.  And  he  ordered  that  no  man  should  read  the  Bible 
aloud,  so  as  to  disturb  the  priest  while  he  sang  mass ;  nor  pre- 
sume to  expound  doubtful  places  without  help  from  the  learned." 
— -[Hume.] 

But  with  the  Bible,  even  though  it  were  chained  in  the 
churches,  if  it  were  allowed  to  be  read  by  the  people  at  all,  how 
could  the  doctrines  of  Popery  maintain  their  ground  ?  From 
this  moment,  the  light  which  had  gleamed  so  faintly,  began  to 
increase  to  the  dawn  of  morning.  Soon  the  system  of  Popery 
and  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation  began  to  conflict  in  the 
pulpits.  Could  men  be  saved  by  the  use  of  holy  water,  ghostly 
absolution,  extreme  unction,  and  the  Eucharist ;  or  must  holy- 
principles,  deep  repentance,  a  living  faith,  renew  and  transform 
the  soul  ?  Is  salvation  of  works  and  priestly  offices  ;  or  is  it  of 
grace,  and  by  faith  alone  ?  Is  Christianity  a  religion  of  forms 
and  incantations,  or  is  it  a  religion  of  the  heart  ?  So  opposite 
were  the  two  schemes,  and  so  earnest  the  conflict,  that  the  king 
forbade  all  preaching,  till  himself,  as  head  of  the  Church,  could 
set  forth  the  scheme  of  doctrine  in  which  all  should  be  required 
to  agree. 

The  king  himself  drew  up  the  articles,  to  which  both  houses 
of  Convocation  gave  their  assent  as  a  matter  of  course.  In  this 
system  of  doctrine,  Popery  and  the  Reformation  were  made  to 
mingle  their  discordant  elements,  and  alternately  shared  the 
several  articles  of  faith.  First,  the  Scripture,  with  three  ancient 
creeds, — the  Apostles',  the  Nicene,  and  the  Athanasian,  were 
made  the  standard  of  belief  without  the  traditions  or  decrees  of 
the  Pope. 

Justification  by  Faith,  not  for  any  merit  or  work  done  by  us, 
but  for  the  merits  of  the  blood  and  passion  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  alone ; — in  the  next  breath,  auricular  confession  and 
penance,  are  enjoined  as  essential  to  salvation. 

Marriage,  extreme  unction,  confirmation,  and  orders,  were  no 
longer  mentioned  as  sacraments ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  people 
were  required  to  believe  « that  in  the  sacrament  of  the  altar,  un- 


44  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

• 

der  the  form  of  bread,  there  was  truly  and  substantially  present 
the  same  body  of  Christ  that  was  born  of  the  Virgin."  "  The 
Catholics  prevailed,"  says  Hume,  "  in  asserting  the  use  of  images  ; 
the  Protestants  in  warning  the  people  against  idolatry."  People 
were  still  taught  to  pray  to  the  saints.  The  prescribed  ceremo- 
nies of  worship  were  to  be  regarded  as  not  only  good  and  law- 
ful, but  as  possessing  a  mystic  signification  and  power.  Such 
was  the  use  of  priestly  vestments,  holy  water,  "  bearing  candles 
on  Candlemas  day ;  giving  ashes  on  Ash  Wednesday;  bearing 
palms  on  Palm  Sunday ;  creeping  to  the  cross  on  Good  Friday ; 
hallowing  the  fount,  and  other  exercises  and  benedictions." 

The  article  on  Purgatory,  says  Hume,  "  contains  the  most 
curious  jargon,  ambiguity,  and  hesitation,  arising  from  the  mix- 
tures of  the  two  tenets  :  the  people  were  to  believe  it  good  and 
charitable  to  pray  for  the  souls  of  the  departed ;  but  since  the 
place  they  were  in,  and  the  pain  they  suffered,  were  uncertain  by 
Scripture,  people  ought  to  remit  them  to  God's  mercy.  There- 
fore all  abuses  of  the  doctrine  ought  to  be  put  away,  and.  the 
people  disengaged  from  believing  that  Popish  masses,  or  pray- 
ers, said  in  certain  places  and  before  certain  images,  could 
deliver  souls  out  of  purgatory." 

In  the  meantime  the  Pope  was  endeavoring  to  spirit  up  the 
people  and  clergy  to  rebellion ;  but  not  succeeding  in  this,  he 
fulminated  his  sentence  of  excommunication  against  the  whole 
kingdom ;  declared  the  king  destitute  of  any  title  to  the  crown  ; 
forbade  his  subjects  to  obey  him,  and  all  princes  to  correspond 
with  him.  The  clergy  were  commanded  to  depart  from  the 
kingdom,  and  the  nobility  to  rise  in  arms  against  the  king.  For 
all  this  the  king  took  ample  vengeance  on  the  adherents  of 
the  Pope,  and  pushed  on  the  Reformation  with  great  vigor. 
He  enjoined  it  upon  the  clergy  to  publish  twice  a  quarter 
that  the  Pope's  power  was  usurped,  and  without  authority 
of  Scripture ;  to  exhort  the  people  to  teach  their  children  the 
Lord's  prayer,  the  Creed,  and  the  Commandments,  in  English; 
and  ordered  that  every  incumbent  should  explain  these,  one 
article  a  day,  till  the  people  were  instructed  in  them.  Thus 
the  very  things,  for  which  so  many  of  the  followers  of  Wickliffe 
and  Luther  had  been  burnt,  were  now  enjoined  by  authority  of 
the  king. 

A  book  was  now  put  forth  by  the  command  of  the  king,  entitled 
"  THE  INSTITUTION  OF  A  CHRISTIAN  MAN,"  but  more  commonly 
called  THE  BISHOPS'  BOOK,  having  been  composed  by  Cranmer, 
the  bishops  of  London,  Winchester,  Chichester,  Norwich,  Ely, 
Latimer,  bishop  of  Worcester,  and  the  bishops  of  Salisbury,  Here- 
ford, St.  Davids,  and  some  other  divines.  This  book  contained 
an  explanation  of  the  Lord's  prayer,  the  Creed,  the  Sacraments, 


REIGN    OP    KING    HENRY  VIII.  45 

the  commandments,  the  Ave  Maria,  the  doctrines  of  justification 
and  purgatory,  according  to  the  theology  of  the   times. 

One  thing  is  worthy  of  notice,  as  showing  that  the  modern 
notion  of  the  Divine  right  of  Bishops,  as  an  order  superior  to 
Presbyters,  was  not  then  even  dreamed  of  by  the  heads  of  the 
*  Church  of  England.  This  book,  "  The  Institution  of  a  Chris- 
tian man,"  declares  that  "  In  the  New  Testament  there  is  no 
mention  made  of  any  degrees  or  orders  but  only  of  Deacons  (or 
ministers)  and  of  PRIESTS  (or  Bishops) ;"  thus  renouncing  all 
claim  of  Divine  authority  for  more  than  two  orders  of  clergy. 
This  book  was  subscribed  by  the  two  archbishops,  by  nineteen 
bishops,  by  the  lower  house  of  Convocation ;  and  was  put  forth 
with  the  whole  authority  of  the  Church  and  the  king,  its  acknow- 
ledged head. 

The  careful  manner  in  which  the  opinions  of  this  book  were 
drawn  up,  is  worthy  of  notice.  A  committee  of  the  highest  dig- 
nitaries of  the  Church,  and  of  the  most  learned  divines  in  the 
kingdom  was  previously  called  to  sit  and  deliberate  upon  mat- 
ters of  religion.  The  topics  which  they  were  to  examine  were 
divided  into  heads  and  proposed  in  questions.  These  were 
given  out  to  the  bishops  arid  divines,  and  at  a  set  time  every  one 
brought  in  his  opinion  in  writing  on  all  the  heads.  Then  all 
conferred  on  points  of  difference  until  they  were  able  to  agree  an 
something  to  lay  before  the  Convocation.  One  of  these  confer- 
ences was  held  in  1537,  or  1538 ;  and  one  of  the  papers  drawn 
up  was  entitled  "  A  Declaration  of  the  functions  and  Divine  in- 
stitution of  Bishops  and  Priests"  This  paper,  signed  by  Cran- 
rner  and  a  large  number  of  bishops  and  priests,  contains  the  fol- 
lowing passage :  "  In  the  New  Testament,  there  is  no  mention 
made  of  any  degrees  or  distinction  in  orders,  but  only  of  Deacons 
(or  ministers)  and  Priests  (or  bishops) ;"  thus  deliberately  deny- 
ing the  existence  of  more  than  two  orders  of  permanent  Church 
officers  in  the  New  Testament ;  and  making  bishops  and  pres- 
byters identical.  Again  in  1540,  a  commission  sitting  with 
Cranmer  at  their  head,  declared,  says  Bishop  Burnet,  "  That  the 
Scripture  makes  express  mention  of  only  two  orders,  Priests  and 
Deacons" 

Three  years  after  this,  another  book  was  published,  entitled 
"  THE  NECESSARY  ERUDITION  OF  A  CHRISTIAN  MAN  ;"  corrected 
by  the  king's  hand,  and  approved  by  the  parliament  as  the  au- 
thoritative faith  of  the  nation.  This  book  likewise  asserts  that 
Bishops  and  Priests  are  of  the  same  order,  and  limits  the  num- 
ber of  scriptural  Church  officers  to  two  orders,  Bishops  (or 
Priests)  and  Deacons. 

Here,  perhaps,  I  ought  to  notice  a  singular  statement  made  in 
a  recent  work  on  Episcopacy,  entitled  "  A  view  of  the  or- 


46  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ganization  and  order  of  the  Primitive  Church  ;"*  a  work  widely 
and  earnestly  circulated  and  extolled  by  the  advocates  of  Epis- 
copacy in  this  quarter.  This  book  also  quotes  these  passages 
concerning  the  two  orders,  from  the  "  Institution  "  and  from  the 
"  Erudition  of  a  Christian  man ;"  but  maintains  that  Cranmer 
and  his  coadjutor  were  not  Reformers  when  they  penned  these 
documents  ;  and  that  to  quote  them  as  evidence  of  what  the  Re- 
formers thought,  "  is  gross  misrepresentation."  Indeed,  the  au- 
thor of  this  work  earnestly  argues  that  when  Cranmer  and  his 
coadjutors  were  Reformers,  in  the  days  of  King  Edward,  they 
were  of  another  opinion,  and  maintained  the  Divine  right  of 
Bishops  as  above  Presbyters.  The  statements  in  the  "Institution  " 
and  the  "  Erudition"  he  says,  "  were  the  opinions  of  these  men 
as  Romanists,  and  not  as  Reformers;  and  the  man  who  quotes 
them  as  such,  is  either  too  IGNORANT  to  write,  or  too  DISHONEST 
to  be  trusted."^ 

It  so  happens  that  the  learned  and  celebrated  Stillingfleet, 
more  than  a  century  ago,  had  occasion  to  refer  to  the  opinions 
of  the  Reformers  upon  these  points ;  and  not  only  maintained, 
but  proved,  by  a  reference  to  original  manuscript  documents, — 
the  best  of  all  possible  evidence,  that  the  views  of  the  Reformers 
were  precisely  these,  and  that  too  at  the  brightest  point  of  the 
Reformation. 

Says  Stillingfleet,  "  I  doubt  not  to  make  it  evident,  that  before 
these  late  unhappy  times,  the  main  grounds  for  settling1  Episcopal 
government  in  the  nation,  WAS  NOT  ACCOUNTED  ANY  PRETENCE  OF 
DIVINE  RIGHT,  but  the  coNVENiENCY  of  that  form  of  government 
to  the  state  of  this  Church  at  the  time  of  its  Reformation"  And 
here  he  says,  "  I  meddle  not  with  the  times  of  Henry  VIIL,  when 
I  will  not  deny  but  the  first  quickening  of  the  Reformation  might 
be;  I  date  the  birth  of  it  from  the  first  settlement  of  that  most 
excellent  prince  Edward  VI."  Then  passing  by  the  times  of 
Henry  VIIL,  into  the  times  of  the  undoubted  Reformation,  he 
points  out  the  steps  by  which  the  lower  house  of  the  Convocation 
obtained  liberty  of  proceeding  in  the  work  of  Reformation  :  for 
otherwise  the  law  forbade  them  to  agitate  the  question.  He 
gives  the  petitions  at  length.  He  relates  how  a  select  assembly 
of  bishops  and  divines  were  gathered  at  Windsor  Castle,  by 
King  Edward's  special  order,  to  digest  matters  preparatory  to  a 
thorough  Reformation.  Here  were  Cranmer,  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, the  Archbishop  of  York,  the  Bishops  of  Rochester,  Lon- 
don, Carlisle,  and  others  of  the  most  distinguished  of  the  reform- 

*  By  A.  B.  Chapin. 

t  These  passages  had  been  so  quoted  by  Dr.  Dwight  in  his  Theology,  and  by  Dr. 
Hawes,  in  his  "  Tribute  to  the  memory  of  the  Pilgrims ;"  I  know  not  to  whom  else 
these  savory  epithets  may  be  considered  as  having  a  designed  and  special  reference. 


REIGN  OF  HENRY  VIII.  47 

ing  divines.  They  followed  the  same  course  as  the  committee 
in  the  time  of  Henry  VIII. :  each  one  giving  his  opinion  in  writ- 
ing, on  several  questions  previously  propounded  to  all;  and 
when  all  was  agreed  upon,  the  result  was  recorded  in  Cranmer'' s 
own  hand.  From  that  manuscript  of  Cranmer,  Stillingfleet  copies 
the  evidence  in  question.  I  can  give  only  a  small  part,  and  refer 
those  who  would  see  it  in  its  whole  extent,  to  Stillingfleet's 
"  Irenicum,"  where  it  is  to  be  found. 

Question  10.  "  Whether  bishops  or  priests  were  first;  and 
if  the  priest^  then  the  priest  made  the  bishop  ?"  Answer.  "  The 
bishops  and  priests  were  at  one  time,  and  were  not  two  things,  but 
one  office  in  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  religion" 

Question  1 1.  "  Whether  a  bishop  hath  authority  to  make  a 
priest^  by  Scripture,  or  no ;  and  whether  any  other,  but  only  a 
bishop,  may  make  a  priest  ?"  Answer.  "  A  bishop  may  make  a 
priest,  by  the  Scripture^  and  so  may  princes  and  governors  also, 
by  that  authority  God  committed  to  them;  and  THE  PEOPLE  ALSO  BY 
ELECTION."  "  For  as  we  read  that  bishops  have  done  it,  so 
Christian  emperors  have  done  it.  And  THE  PEOPLE,  before 
Christian  princes  were,  COMMONLY  DID  ELECT  their  bishops  and 
priests" 

Question  12.  "  Whether  in  the  New  Testament  be  required 
any  CONSECRATION  of  a  bishop  or  priest,  or  only  appointing  to 
the  office  be  sufficient  ?  Answer.  "  In  the  New  Testament  to  be 
a  bishop  or  priest  medeth  no  consecration,  by  the  Scripture  :  for 
ELECTION  or  APPOINTING  is  sufficient" 

Question  14.  "  Whether  it  be  for ef ended  by  Gods  law  that  if 
it  is  so  fortuned  that  all  the  bishops  and  priests  were  dead,  and  that 
the  Word  of  God  should  be  unpreached,  the  sacrament  of  baptism 
and  others  unministered,  that  the  king  of  that  region  should  make 
bishops  and  priests  to  supply  the  same,  or  no  ?"  Answer.  "  It  is 
not  against  Gods  law ;  but  contrary  indeed  they  oughPso  to  do  ; 
and  there  be  histories  that  witness  that  some  Christian  princes  and 
other  laymen  unconsecrated  have  done  the  same" 

To  these  declarations  Cranmer  subscribed  his  own  hand,  with 
the  affirmation,  "  THIS  is  MY  OPINION  AT  THE  PRESENT.  Thomas 
Cantauriensis. 

Stillingfleet  goes  on  to  accumulate  evidence  upon  evidence, 
showing  how  long,  and  on  what  high  authority,  the  same  view 
was  held  in  the  Church  of  England.  He  goes  through  the  days 
of  Queen  Elizabeth,  and  shows  that  in  the  articles  of  religion 
agreed  upon  respecting  the  English  form  of  Church  govern- 
ment, that  form  was  only  described  as  being  "  agreeable " 
[meaning  not  contradictory]  "  to  God's  Word."  "  Which  had 
been,"  says  Stillingfleet,  "  a  very  low  and  diminishing  expres- 
sion, had  they  looked  upon  it  as  absolutely  prescribed  and  deter- 


48  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

mined  in  scripture."  He  continues : — "  The  first  who  appeared 
in  vindication  of  the  English  hierarchy  was  Archbishop  Whit- 
gift"  [in  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth],  "whom 
we  cannot  suppose  either  ignorant  of  the  sense  of  the  Church  of 
England,  or  afraid,  or  unwilling  to  defend  it."  Yet  he  frequently 
(against  Cartwright)  asserts,  "  That  the  form  of  discipline  is  not 
particularly  and  by  name  set  clown  in  Scripture  :" — and  again,—- 
"  No  kind  of  government  is  expressed  in  the  word  or  can  necessa- 
rily be  concluded  from  them :"  which  he  repeats,  over  and  over 
again ;  "  No  form  of  Church  government  is  by  the  Scripture  pre- 
scribed to,  or  commanded  in  the  Church  of  God."  Stillingfleet 
goes  on  to  show  the  same  from  Dr.  Cosins,  Dr.  Lowe,  Bishop 
Bridges ;  and  adds,  "  They  who  please  to  consult  the  3d  book 
of  the  learned  and  JUDICIOUS  Master  HOOKER'S  Ecclesiastical 
Polity,  may  see  the  MUTABILITY  of  the  form  of  Church  govern- 
ment largely  asserted  and  fully  proved." 

Indeed  the  Hierarchy  found  it  impossible  to  defend  themselves 
against  the  Puritans  on  any  other  ground.  The  Puritans  showed, 
not  only  that  there  is  no  authority  for  the  Episcopacy,  but  that 
the  Word  of  God  gives  directions  on  the  subject  of  Church 
government,  inconsistent  with  that  scheme.  The  advocates  of 
the  Hierarchy  uniformly  asserted  the  authority  of  the  civil  gov- 
ernment, or  of  the  Church,  to  establish  or  change  the  form  of 
Church  polity,  according  to  circumstances.  "  Yea,"  says  Stilling- 
fleet, "  this  is  so  plain  and  evident  to  have  been  the  chief  opinion 
of  the  divines  of  the  Church  of  England,  that.  Parker"  [the  Puri- 
tan] "  looks  upon  it  as  one  of  the  main  foundations  of  the  Hier- 
archy, and  sets  himself  might  and  main  to  oppose  it." 

"  If  we  come  still  lower,"  says  Stillingfleet,  "to  the  time  of  king 
James,  his  majesty  himself  declared  it  in  print  as  his  judgment, 
that  "  It  is  granted  to  every  Christian  king,  prince,  and  common- 
wealth, to  "prescribe  within  its  own  jurisdiction,  that  external  form 
of  church  government,  which  approaches  as  much  as  possible  to 
its  own  form  of  civil  administration."  But  we  cannot  delay  here 
even  to  enumerate  the  additional  items  of  the  abundant  proof 
which  Stillingfleet  adduces.  Those  who  will  consult  his  "  Ireni- 
cum"  will  perceive  that  his  proof  is  absolute  demonstration  of  the 
position,  that  the  Reformers  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  their 
successors  for  a  long  course  of  years,  rested  the  warrant  for  the 
Episcopal  office  and  jurisdiction,  not  upon  any  pretence  of  divine 
right;  but  upon  grounds  by  which,  to  adopt  the  language  of 
Stillingfleet),  "  The  divine  right  of  Episcopacy,  as  founded  upon 
apostolical  practice,  is  quite  subverted  and  destroyed" 

I  know  not  how  it  is,  that  in  the  face  of  all  this  array  of  facts, 
the  writer  in  question,  in  his  "  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH,"  has  been  led 
into  the  error  of  saying,  that  in  the  Erudition  of  a  Christian  man 


REIGN  OF  HENRY  VIII.  49 

(published  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIIL),  "  is  THE  LAST  THAT  WE 
HEAR  OF  THAT  OPINION," — viz.,  that  Bishops,  as  above  Presby- 
ters, were  not  originally  of  divine  right ;  but  that  Bishops  and 
Priests  were  of  the  same  order. 

To  proceed  with  the  narrative  : — The  "  Necessary  Erudition 
of  a  Christian  man"  became  the  standard  doctrine  of  the  Church 
of  England  ;  for  by  Statute  it  had  been  enacted,  "  That  all  de- 
crees and  ordinances,  which  shall  be  made  and  ordained  by  the 
Archbishops  and  doctors,  and  shall  be  published  with  the  king's 
advice  and  confirmation  by  his  letters  patent,  in  and  upon  matters 
of  Christian  faith,  and  lawful  rites  and  ceremonies  ;  shall  be  in 
every  point  thereof  obeyed  and  performed,  to  all  intents  and 
purposes."  Thus  the  Parliament  had  given  to  the  king  the  pre- 
rogatives of  infallibility,  and  bound  themselves  and  the  kingdom 
to  receive  upon  trust,  without  question  or  examination,  what- 
ever dogmas  or  ceremonies  the  king  and  prelates  should  be 
pleased  to  establish. 

It  was  indeed  provided  that  nothing  should  be  established 
contrary  to  the  laws  and  statutes  of  the  realm  ;  but  this  was  at 
that  period  no  defence,  and  was  only  introduced  to  serve  the 
king's  purposes.  "  By  introducing  confusion  and  contradiction 
into  the  laws,"  says  Hume,  "  he  became  more  master  of  every 
man's  property.  Room  was  left  for  the  civil  courts  tp  interfere 
with  the  ecclesiastical,  whenever  it  became  a  question  what 
ecclesiastical  requisitions  were  contrary  to  the  laws  and  statutes 
of  the  realm.  What  the  king  meant  as  an  instrument  of  tyranny, 
became,  in  the  lapse  of  time,  one  of  the  strongest  defences  against 
ecclesiastical  oppression." 

But  no  Institution  or  Erudition^  no  laws,  imprisonments  or 
burnings,  sufficed  to  repress  the  rising  Reformation.  The  more 
effectually  to  accomplish  this  end  Henry  now  caused  the  law  to 
be  passed  commonly  known  under  the  name  of  the  BLOODY 
STATUTE  ;  informing  his  parliament  "  That  it  was  his  majesty's 
earnest  desire,  to  extirpate  from  his  kingdom  all  diversity  of 
opinion  in  matters  of  religion."  There  were  certain  points 
which  answered  the  purpose  of  a  Shibboleth,  to  sift  those  who 
happened  to  be  tinctured  with  Protestant  views;  and  against 
these  the  six  articles  of  the  Bloody  Statute  were  aimed.  The 
1st  declared,  that  after  the  consecration  of  the  elements  in  the 
Lord's  Supper,  there  remains  no  longer  bread,  but  the  real  natu- 
ral body  of  Christ. 

The  2d  maintained  the  necessity  of  communion  in  one  kind 
alone. 

The  3d  insisted  upon  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy. 

The  4th  upon  the  perpetual  obligations  of  vows  of  chastity. 
4 


50 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


The  5th,  the  benefit  of  private  masses  j  and  the  6th  the  neces- 
sity of  auricular  confession. 

"  If  any  did  speak,  preach,  or  write"  against  the  1st,  they 
should  be  judged  heretics  and  burnt  without  any  benefit  of  ab- 
jurations. Their  real  and  personal  estate  was  forfeit  to  the 
king.  Those  who  should  preach  or  dispute  against  the  other 
articles  were  to  suffer  death  as  felons,  without  benefit  of  clergy  ; 
and  those,  who  either  in  word  or  writing  declared  against  the 
articles,  were  to  be  imprisoned  during  the  king's  pleasure,  for- 
feit goods  and  chattels  for  the  first  offence,  and  for  the  second, 
suffer  death  ;  "  An  unheard  of  severity,"  says  Hume,  "  and  un- 
known to  the  Inquisition  itself." 

It  was  not  long  before  five  hundred  persons  were  in  prison, 
under  the  operation  of  this  statute ;  but  so  great  was  the  influ- 
ence of  Cranmer  and  Cromwell  that  these  were  pardoned.  Lati- 
mer  spoke  against  the  act,  and  was  imprisoned  till  the  king's 
death.  Shaxton,  bishop  of  Salisbury,  spoke  against  the  article, 
and  resigned  ;  but  being  threatened  with  fire,  he  turned  apostate  ; 
and  in  the  days  of  Queen  Mary,  proved  a  cruel  persecutor. 

To  complete  the  system  of  despotism  under  which  England 
groaned,  the  same  parliament  gave  to  the  king's  'proclamation 
the  force  of  the  statute  law :  and,  "  What  proves,"  says  Hume, 
"  either  a  stupid  or  a  wilful  blindness  in  the  parliament  is,  that 
even  after  this  statute,  they  pretended  to  maintain  some  limita- 
tion in  the  government.  To  fill  up  the  measure  of  their  treason 
against  justice  and  right,  they  passed  an  attainder  against  six- 
teen persons  who  had  become  obnoxious  to  the  king's  dislike ; — 
some  under  pretence  of  their  having  denied  the  king's  supre- 
macy ;  and  others  without  mention  of  any  crime ; — persons  who 
had  never  been  convicted ; — no,  nor  brought  to  trial ; — no,  nor 
ever  arraigned  or  formally  accused.  They  were  condemned  and 
destroyed, — -without  accusation,  trial,  or  defence, — -by  a  sove- 
reign act  of  parliament ! 

While  the  king  waged  this  exterminating  warfare  against  Pro- 
testants, he  was  equally  violent  against  the  partizans  of  the 
Pope  ;  so  that  a  stranger  who  was  in  England  at  the  time,  was 
not  far  from  the  truth  when  he  remarked,  that  "  Those  who  were 
against  the  Pope  were  burned,  and  those  who  were  for  him  were 
hanged." 

But  how  could  popish  doctrines  be  maintained  by  dungeons 
and  faggots,  while  the  Bible  was  left  to  speak  to  the  people  ? 
The  BIBLE  was  at  length  discovered  to  be  the  GREAT  ARCH- 
HERETIC,  after  all;  and  like  other  heretics,  if  it  could  not  be 
silenced,  it  must  be  burned.  There  were  indeed  only  five  hun- 
dred copies  of  the  Bible  in  the  common  tongue,  known  to  be  in 
the  whole  realm :  for  that  was  the  extent  of  the  impression. 


REIGN  OF  KING   HENRY  VIII.  51 

These  were  chained  in  the  churches,  and  few  people  could  read, 
yet  those  few  could  read  to  their  neighbors,  and  their  neighbors 
could  tell  what  they  had  heard.  Henry  perceived  that  the  Bible 
was  no  more  compatible  with  his  despotism  over  the  understand- 
ing and  the  conscience  of  the  people,  than  it  was  with  the  despot- 
ism of  the  Pope. 

Accordingly  the  Bible  was  by  statute  forbidden  to  be  read  in 
English  in  any  church.  No  woman,  or  artificer,  or  apprentices, 
journeymen,  husbandmen,  or  laborers,  "were  to  read  the  New 
Testament  in  English.  If  any  spiritual  person  should  be  con- 
victed of  maintaining  anything  contrary  to  the  king's  instructions 
already  made,  he  should  for  the  first  offence  recant ;  for  the 
second  bear  a  faggot ;  for  the  third  be  burned." 

Thus  stood  the  Reformation  in  England,  when  Henry  was 
summoned  away  by  death  on  the  28th  of  January,  A.  D.  1547. 

England  was  severed  from  the  Popedom,  with  immense  gain 
to  its  prosperity  and  political  independence.  It  was  indeed  a 
mighty  movement  to  transfer  the  supremacy  of  the  Church  from 
the  Pope  to  the  king;  as  no  superstitious  reverence  belonged  to 
the  latter,  such  as  kept  the  people  in  abject  subjection  to  the 
infallibility  and  ghostly  power  of  the  former.  But  for  the  present, 
nothing  was  gained  for  civil  or  religious  freedom.  The  English 
had  lost  in  both  these  respects.  But  Henry  could  not  live  for  ever. 
The  seeds  of  truth,  which  he  vainly  strove  to  suppress,  had  taken 
root ;  and  in  the  next  age  they  began  to  yield  their  fruit.  The 
laws  which  he  designed  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  his  tyran- 
nical power,  and  of  crushing  the  Reformation,  afforded  in  the 
next  age  the  means  of  pushing  forward  the  Reformation  with 
greater  rapidity  than  the  natural  progress  of  truth.  Of  course, 
things  were  ready  for  a  re-action  in  the  next  succeeding  age ; 
and  the  same  supremacy,  with  the  same  laws  enacted  to  sustain 
it,  gave  the  bloody  Mary  power  to  carry  England  back  once  more 
to  the  bosom  of  Rome.  So  impotent  is  power  to  resist  the  pro- 
gress of  truth :  so  useless  is  violence  to  push  forward  reform 
faster  than  the  truth  itself  makes  progress. 

Had  the  Church  been  severed  from  the  State  ;  with  the  Word 
of  God,  aside  from  traditions  the  sole  standard  of  faith  and  duty : 
had  the  hierarchy — that  excrescence  upon  the  simple  institutions 
of  Christ, — not  been  in  existence  ;  had  the  people  been  free  to 
follow  the  Word  of  God,  calling,"  no  man  master," — how  swiftly, 
and  how  surely  would  the  Reformation  have  spread  over  Eng- 
land !  What  untold  sorrows ;  what  tears ;  what  burnings  and 
blood  might  have  been  spared !  Had  it  not  been  for  the  obstruc- 
tion of  hierarchical  power,  and  Church  authority  and  traditmn, 
how  many  times  would  the  incipient  Reformation, — which  so 
often  broke  out  in  Italy,  in  France,  and  in  Spain, — have  gone 


52  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

on  to  its  completion  !  But  the  Inquisition,  and  the  sword,  though 
they  could  not  resist  the  arguments  of  the  witnesses,  could  yet 
destroy  the  witnesses  themselves.  Let  the  people  guard  their 
rights.  Let  them  distrust  the  wisdom  and  kindness  of  those 
who  would  bring  in  the  traditions,  and  ceremonies,  and  formula- 
ries of  a  usurping  hierarchy,-— as  a  safer  bulwark  of  their  liber- 
ties than  the  simple  Word  of  God.  THE  WORD  OF  GOD  ;  with  no 
bond  upon  the  conscience  ;  no  impediment  upon  the  judgment, 
to  compel  men  to  interpret  it  according  to  the  decisions  of  a  pre- 
tended Catholic  tradition  ; — this  is  the  BEST  FRIEND  6r  FREEDOM 
and  of  the  rights  of  man  ;  this  is  the  best, — the  only  divine  bul- 
wark,— of  the  truth.  Let  it  be  for  Prelates  and  Popes  to  decry 
the  exercise  and  even  the  right  of  private  judgment,  and  to  pro- 
claim a  human  production, — >a  prayer  book — as  a  safer  standard 
than  the  Word  of  God.  Our  fathers  have  taught  us  to  "  count 
nothing1  old  that  will  not  stand  by  the  Word  of  God ;  and  nothing1 
new,  that  will"  The  Word  of  God, and  no  tradition :  the  Word 
of  God,  our  immediate  instructor,  with  no  authoritative  interpreter 
between  to  hush  its  voice  or  to  enchain  our  understanding;  THE 
WORD  OF  GOD — UNBOUND  AND  FREE  ! — this  is  our  principle  ;  the 
watchword  of  freedom  :  the  watch-cry  of  everlasting  truth. 


IV. 


REIGN  OF  EDWARD  VI. 

Persecutions  stopped.  Doctrinal  disputes  revived.  Book  of  Homilies. 
First  service  book :  revised :  never  satisfactory  to  the  Reformers.  Sup- 
posed necessity  of  forming  such  a  liturgy  as  to  keep  the  Popish  people 
in  the  Church.  Discrepancy  between  the  Articles  and  Offices.  Prayer 
Book  an  equivocal  standard :  fairly  quoted  by  each  of  two  irrecon- 
cileable  schemes.  The  question  of  a  Liturgy.  No  right  anywhere  to 
impose  one.  Imposed  not  by  the  Church,  but  by  Parliament  and  Coun- 
cil. Uniformity  enforced.  Reforming  the  Ordinal.  Rise  of  the  Puritans. 

EDWARD  VI.  came  to  the  throne  in  the  10th  year  of  his  age, 
A.D.  1547,  seventy-three  years  before  the  landing  of  the  Pilgrims 
at  Plymouth. 

The  directorship  of  the  faith  and  worship  of  the  kingdom 
having  been  vested  in  the  crown,  it  now  fell  into  the  hands  of  the 
Executive  council,  named  by  Henry  VIIL,  and  of  the  young 
king ;  who  had  been  trained  under  instructors  selected  by  Cran- 
mer,  and  early  imbued  with  the  true  principles  of  the  gospel. 

By  all  Protestant  authorities,  Edward  VI.  is  regarded,  for  his 
enlightened  views,  his  solid  judgment  beyond  his  years,  and  his 
conscientious  regard  for  righteousness  and  truth,  the  wonder 
of  his  age.  He  was  surrounded  by  a  bright  galaxy  of  Re- 
formers. There  was  the  meek  and  guileless  Cranmer,  whom 
the  truth  and  the  Spirit  of  God  had  led  from  the  darkness  of 
Popery  to  a  discovery  of  the  way  of  life  through  faith  in  Christ 
alone  ;  and  yet  he  had  been  so  gradually  led,  that  he  always  re- 
tained the  confidence  of  that  tyrant  monster  Henry  VIIL,  who 
would  in  an  instant  have  committed  him  to  the  flames,  had  he 
dreamed  that  his  favorite  was  capable  of  ever  exchanging  the 
dogmas  of  popery  for  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation.  There, 
too,  was  the  venerable  and  true-hearted  Larimer,  the  zealous 
Hooper,  the  eloquent  Ridley,  and  John  Rogers^  and  Miles 
Coverdale ;  of  whom  the  last  three  had  been  among  those  who 
fled  into  exile  for  conscience'  sake,  in  the  reign  of  Henry  ;  £nd 
who  were  now  welcomed  back  to  their  native  land.  There  were 
also  many  others  whose  names  are  to  be  had  in  high  honor  by 


54  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

all  who  love  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  and  who  know  what  the 
true  gospel  and  religious  liberty  are  worth. 

These  were  good  men  and  true  Reformers  ;  still  they  were 
men,  and  were  surrounded  with  difficulties.  Many  of  the  great 
principles  concerning  the  proper  limit  of  civil  or  ecclesiastical 
power,  and  concerning  the  rights  of  conscience,  had  never  been 
discussed.  If,  therefore,  the  Reformation  was  conducted,  in  some 
measure,  on  principles  inconsistent  with  itself,  that  was  the  fault 
not  so  much  of  the  Reformers  as  of  the  times.  If  in  some  re- 
spects they  progressed  too  slowly  to  suit  the  more  zealous ;  if  in 
some  respects  they  did  not  carry  the  Reformation  so  far  as  purity 
in  doctrine  and  worship  demanded,  they  themselves  saw  and 
deplored  it ;  and  had  the  times  allowed,  they  would  certainly 
have  carried  the  Reformation  further.  They  were  by  no  means 
of  the  opinion  of  some  at  the  present  day,  that  all  was  done 
which  a  regard  for  purity  in  worship  demanded  ;  much  less  were 
they  of  the  opinion  of  those  who  now  lament  that  the  Reforma- 
tion was  carried  too  far. 

No  sooner  was  King  Henry  in  his  grave  than  it  appeared  that 
a  majority  of  those  whom  he  had  selected  to  compose  the  Execu- 
tive Council  during  the  minority  of  the  young  king,  were  strongly 
in  favor  of  the  Reformation;  and  that  majority  embraced  the 
most  important  members,  with  Hereford  the  Protector,  and 
Cranmer  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  at  their  head.  The 
ample  power  put  into  their  hands  they  determined  to  wield  in 
favor  of  a  Reformation,  with  as  much  energy  as  was  consistent 
with  prudence. 

The  persecution  under  the  bloody  six  Articles,  was  stopped. 
The  prison  doors  were  thrown  open.  The  exiles  from  the  king- 
dom for  conscience'  sake  were  recalled.  The  reforming  preachers 
opened  their  mouths  once  more.  The  defenders  of  Popery 
hurled  back  their  defiance.  Ridley  preached  against  images  ; 
the  people  in  some  places  began  to  remove  them  from  the 
churches.  Gardiner  raised  his  voice  in  defence  of  the  images, 
and  vainly  tried  by  legal  prosecutions  to  crush  those  who 
ventured  to  destroy  them.  Ridley  decried  the  use  of  such  things 
as  Holy  Water,  and  consecrated  candles.  Gardiner  wrote  an 
elaborate  "  Apology  for  Holy  Water,"  which  he  maintained 
"  might  be  made  by  the  divine  power,  an  instrument  of  much 
good."  From  the  dispute  about  superstitious  instruments  and 
observances,  the  contest  descended  to  the  very  foundations  of 
faith;  bringing  into  conflict  the  two  great  opposing  schemes, 
Popery  and  the  Reformation  ;  justification  by  sacraments,  masses, 
absolutions,  and  ceremonials, — or  justification  by  faith  alone,  to 
the  exclusion  of  all  account  of  any  priestly  interventions  whatever. 
The  council  determined  on  a  general  visitation  of  all  the 


REIGN  OF  EDWARD  VI.  55 

dioceses  in  the  kingdom.  The  most  eloquent  and  influential  of 
the  Reforming  divines  were  appointed  to  accompany  the  visitors ; 
to  preach  everywhere  the  great  truths  of  religion,  and  to  bring 
the  people  off'  from  the  old  superstitions.  Thirty-six  injunctions 
were  sent  from  the  King,  to  be  everywhere  observed,  requiring, 
among  other  things,  the  observance  of  the  laws  against  the  Pope's 
supremacy  ;  directing  the  clergy  to  preach  once  a  quarter  against 
pilgrimages  and  praying  to  images ;  commanding  that  such 
images  as  had  been  abused  with  pilgrimages  and  offerings, 
should  be  taken  down ;  forbidding  processions  about  church- 
yards and  all  ringing  of  bells  before  high  mass,  save  one  ;  re- 
quiring all  shrines,  candlesticks,  trindrills,  rolls  of  wax,  pictures, 
paintings,  and  other  monuments  of  feigned  miracles  to  be  re- 
moved ;  requiring  the  churches  each  to  be  furnished  with  a  Bible 
within  three  months ;  and  within  twelve  months,  with  Erasmus's 
paraphrase  of  the  New  Testament,  and  enjoining  the  Bible  to  be 
read  in  all  the  churches. 

A  BOOK  OF  HOMILIES,  consisting  of  twelve  discourses  on  the 
topics  most  important  at  the  time,  and  containing  a  vindication  of 
the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  was  ordered  to  be  left  with  every 
parish  priest,  who  was  enjoined  to  read  these  Homilies  to  the 
people. 

When  the  Parliament  met  in  1547,  they  concurred  in  the  line 
of  policy  pursued  by  the  Council.  The  laws  against  Lollardism 
were  repealed.  The  bloody  statute  of  the  six  Articles  was 
repealed.  The  Act  giving  to  the  King's  proclamation  the  force 
of  law,  was  repealed.  This  was  indeed  the  dawning  of  liberty  to 
the  people  of  England. 

The  Council  struck  once  more  at  superstitious  ceremonies  and 
customs ;  candles  were  no  longer  to  be  carried  on  Candlemas 
day ;  nor  ashes  on  Ash- Wednesday  ;  nor  palms  on  Palm  Sunday. 
All  images  were  ordered  to  be  removed  from  the  churches. 

These  innovations  amounted  almost  to  a  total  change  of  the 
established  religion.  Indeed  such  it  was  designed  to  be.  It  was 
not  the  ceremony  or  the  image  alone  that  was  concerned,  but 
in  these  symbols  the  whole  system  of  Popery  was  intended  to 
be  assailed.  But  the  outward  reform  was  now  carried  by  the 
hand  of  power  beyond  the  progress  of  light.  The  great  body  of 
the  priests  and  the  people  had  not  yet  understood  the  truth  ;  and 
were  not  ripe  for  these  external  changes.  The  debate  of  words 
now  began  to  reach  the  crisis  of  violence.  The  king  thereupon 
issued  his  proclamation  requiring  these  contentions  to  cease,  and 
signifying  his  intention  of  soon  having  one  uniform  order 
throughout  the  realm.  Till  that  order  could  be  set  forth,  all 
manner  of  persons  were  forbidden  to  preach  save  by  special 
license,  either  in  the  pulpit  or  otherwise. 


OD  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

This  was  the  origin  of  the  first  Service  book  or  Liturgy  of  King 
Edward  VI.  A  committee  of  divines,  with  Cranmer  at  their 
head,  were  appointed  to  reform  the  Offices  of  the  Church.  They 
began  with  the  Eucharist.  This,  instead  of  a  communion  or 
commemoration  of  the  death  of  Christ,  had  become  "  A  sort  of 
mystical  ceremony,  chiefly  for  the  alleged  purpose  of  delivering 
souls  out  of  purgatory  ;  and  was  claimed  to  be  a  real  propitiatory 
sacrifice  and  offering  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  which  the 
priest  wrought  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins."  This  was  now 
changed  into  a  communion  in  both  kinds.  In  other  respects  the 
office  of  the  mass  was  left  very  much  "  as  it  stood."  Out  of  the 
Romish  Missals  of  Sarum,  York,  Hereford,  and  Bangor  (for  Po- 
pery had  never  required  a  uniform  liturgy  in  England),  they 
compiled  the  Morning  and  Evening  Service  "  almost  in  the  same 
form  as  it  stands  at  present." — [Neale.]  From  the  same  mate- 
rials they  compiled  a  Litany,  "  the  same  now  used,"  except  the 
petition  to  be  delivered  from  the  tyranny  of  the  bishop  of  Rome 
and  all  his  detestable  enormities ;  which  petition,  in  the  review 
of  the  Liturgy  under  Queen  Elizabeth,  was  struck  out. 

In  the  ministration  of  baptism,  a  cross  was  to  be  made  on  the 
child's  forehead  and  breast :  the  devil  was  to  be  exorcised ;  the 
child  was  to  be  dipped  (not  immersed,  as  some  pretend)  three 
times  in  the  font :  on  the  right  side,  on  the  left,  and  on  the 
breast,  if  not  weak. 

In  the  office  of  burial,  the  soul  of  the  departed  was  to  be  recom- 
mended to  the  mercy  of  God ;  the  minister  was  to  pray  that  the 
sins  which  he  had  committed  in  this  world  might  be  forgiven ; 
that  he  might  be  admitted  into  heaven  and  his  body  raised  at  the 
last  day. 

By  the  law  of  Parliament,  all  divine  offices  were  to  be  per- 
formed according  to  this  book  from  the  feast  of  Whitsunday, 
1549.  "  Such  of  the  clergy  as  refused,  or  officiated  in  any  other 
manner,  should,  upon  the  first  conviction,  suffer  six  months'  im- 
prisonment, and  forfeit  a  year's  profit  of  their  benefices.  For  the 
second  conviction,  the  offender  was  to  forfeit  all  his  church  pre- 
ferments, and  suffer  a  year's  imprisonment.  Such  as  wrote  or 
printed  against  the  Liturgy  were  to  be  fined  £\Q  for  the  first 
offence  ;  £20  for  the  second ;  and  for  the  third,  forfeit  all  their 
goods  and  be  imprisoned  for  life." 

The  people  exhibited  great  unwillingness  to  give  up  their  an- 
cient rituals  :  and  to  put  it  out  of  their  power  to  observe  them, 
the  clergy  were  ordered  to  deliver  up  the  articles  which  com- 
posed the  gear  of  popish  service;  such  as  "  antiphonals,  missals, 
grails,  processionals,  legends,  portuasses,"  and  other  things  of 
like  sort ;  of  which  we,  in  our  simplicity,  at  the  present  day, 
scarcely  know  the  uses  or  the  names.  "  All  who  had  in  their 


REIGN   OF  EDWARD  VI.  57 

houses  images  that  had  belonged  to  any  church,  were  required 
to  deface  them  ;  and  to  dash  out  of  their  primers  all  prayers  to 
the  saints." 

If  worship  was  to  be  performed  by  the  use  of  a  prescribed  and 
uniform  liturgy,  the  Liturgy  now  established  was  probably  re- 
formed as  far  as  the  times  allowed.  The  Papists  would  not  en- 
dure any  more  ;  the  Protestants  would  not  be  satisfied  with  less : 
to  suit  the  exigency  of  the  times  the  Liturgy  was  cautiously 
framed,  while  it  was  not  all  that  those  who  framed  it  desired. 
In  L552,  it  underwent  a  revision.  Some  things  were  added ; 
some  that  had  been  retained  through  the  necessity  of  the  times, 
were  stricken  out.  A  rubric  was  added  concerning  the  posture 
of  kneeling  at  the  sacrament ;  declaring  that  no  adoration  was 
intended  to  the  bread  and  wine  ;  nor  did  they  think  that  the  very 
flesh  and  blood  of  Christ  were  there  present.  This  was  after- 
wards struck  out  by  Queen  Elizabeth  to  give  latitude  to  the  Pa- 
pists ;  much  to  the  grief  of  the  Puritans  :  but  in  the  reign  of 
Charles  II.  it  was,  at  their  instance,  again  inserted.  Sundry  old 
rites  which  had  been  retained  in  the  former  book  were  discon- 
tinued, as,  the  use  of  oil  in  confirmation  and  extreme  unction  ; 
prayer  for  the  dead ;  and  the  use  of  the  cross  in  confirmation  and 
the  eucharist.  By  this  book  of  common-prayer,  "  All  copes  were 
forbidden  throughout  England;  the  prebendaries  of  St.  Paul  left 
their  hoods,  and  the  bishops  their  crosses"  [Strype,  in  Neale.]  "  In 
short,  the  whole  liturgy  was  reduced  to  the  form  in  which  it  now 
appears,  excepting  some  small  variations  that  have  since  been 
made."— [Neale.] 

That  the  Prayer  Book  contains  many^and  very  great  excellen- 
ces, all  will  readily  acknowledge.  Its  compilers,  however,  never 
thought  of  it  as  a  standard,  beyond  which  the  Reformation  was 
never  to  advance.  On  the  contrary,  they  lamented  that  the  state 
of  the  nation  rendered  it  impracticable  to  cleanse  it  further  from 
the  defilements  of  Popery.  Cranmer  was  never  satisfied  with 
the  Liturgy  ;  and  designed  a  thorough  alteration,  if  not  an  entire 
change ;  King  Edward  was  not  satisfied  with  this,  or  with  the 
discipline  of  the  Church,  and  laments  in  his  diary,  that  he  could 
"  not  restore  the  primitive  discipline  according  to  his  heart's  desire, 
because  of  several  of  the  bishops,  some  for  age,  some  for  igno- 
rance, some  out  of  love  to  Popery,  were  unwilling  to  it." 

The  desire  for  further  reformation  appears  in  the  sermons  of  La- 
timer,  Hooper,  Bradford,  and  others.  John  A'Lasco  wrote,  "  that 
King  Edward  desired  that  the  rites  and  ceremonies  used  under 
Popery  should  be  purged  out  by  degrees ;  that  it  was  his  pleasure 
that  strangers  should  have  churches  to  perform  all  things  accord' 
ing  to  apostolical  observations  only,  that  by  this  means,  the  Eng- 
lish churches  might  be  excited  to  embrace  apostolic  purity  with 


58  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  unanimous  consent  of  the  states  of  the  kingdom."  It  was  left 
written  in  the  preface  to  one  of  the  service  books,  that  "  They  had 
gone  as  far  as  they  could  in  reforming  the  Church,  considering  the 
times  they  lived  in,  and  hoped  that  they  that  came  after  them, 
would,  as  they  might,  do  more." 

Stillingfleet  [Irenicum,  p.  58]  speaking  of  the  causes  which  in- 
duced the  reformed  French  churches,  in  order  to  please  the  Pa- 
pists, to  insert  into  their  prayer-books  "that  which  men  would 
scarcely  believe  unless  they  saw  it,"  says,  "  The  same  temper  was 
used  by  our  reformers  in  composing  our  Liturgy,  in  reference 
to  the  Papists ;  to  whom  they  had  an  especial  eye,  as  being  the 
only  party  then  appearing  in  the  Church,  whom  they  desired  to 
draw  into  their  communion  by  coming  as  near  to  them  as  they  well 
and  safely  could"* 

That  this  might  be  good  state  policy  it  is  not  necessary  to 
question.  Whether  such  a  veering  between  Popery  and  the 
Reformation,  was  likely  to  secure  a  liturgy  and  discipline  so  pure 
as  to  satisfy  all  devout  and  conscientious  men,  is  quite  another 
affair.  Certain  it  is,  that  the  Reformers  were  not  satisfied  with 
that  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  which  it  is  now  the  custom  to  extol 
with  praises  extravagant  and  almost  idolatrous.  The  articles 
were  made  such  as  the  Reformers  would  have  them,  and  are,  as 
a  system,  a  noble  monument  of  a  pure  and  enlightened  faith. 
The  OFFICES  of  the  Prayer-Book,— drawn  from  popish  originals, 
and  left  with  the  rituals  and  vestments  retaining  as  much  of  the 
shape  and  fashion  and  savor  of  Popery  as  would  render  them 
not  idolatrous  ; — and  so  left  by  the  Reformers  only  for  the  pre- 
sent, with  the  hope  of  further  amendment  when  the  limes  should 
allow  it ; — these  offices  contain  many  things  which  it  is  not  hard 
to  interpret  into  a  close  alliance  with  Popery  itself.  They  still 
inculcate  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration.  In  the  Lord's 
Supper  they  are  not  expurgated  from  the  consecrations,  the  obla- 
tions, and  other  popish  appendages,  which  left  King  James  so 
much  reason  to  say  that  it  was  but  "  An  ill  mumbled  mass." 

To  this  origin  of  the  Liturgy,  and  to  this  desire  of  "  Keeping 
the  popish  people  in  the  Church,"  it  is  owing — as  I  conceive, — 
that  the  Evangelical  and  the  Tractarian  parties  in  the  Episcopal 
Church  at  the  present  day,  both  appeal  with  so  much  justice  and 
with  such  entire  confidence,  to  the  same  Prayer-Book  as  favoring 

*  Indeed  in  after  times,  when  the  Liturgy  was  finally  settled  under  Elizabeth,  this 
design  of  so  arranging  the  Liturgy  and  ceremonials  as  to  "  keep  the  popish  people  in  the 
church"  was  boldly  avowed  and  defended  as  a  matter  of  necessary  policy.  Thus 
Maddox,  who  wrote  more  than  a  hundred  years  ago  against  Neale's  History  of  the 
Puritans,  and  afterwards  was  rewarded  with  a  bishopric,  hesitates  not  to  avow  that 
"  As  the  nation  in  general  was  popish,  it  plainly  appeared  an  act  of  great  compassion 
to  many  thousand  souls,  as  well  as  necessary  to  the  Queens  safety,  and  the  success  of 
the  Reformation,  to  CONTRIVE,  if  it  were  possible,  SUCH  A  FORM  OF  WORSHIP,  without 
idolatry,  which  might  KEEP  THE  POPISH  PEOPLE  IN  THE  CHURCH." 


REIGN  OF  EDWARD  VI.  59 

each  of  their  discordant  and  irreconcilable  schemes.  It  does  so 
favor  them.  The  Reformation  was  purposely  so  mingled  with 
Popery  in  that  book  as  to  quiet  the  Protestants  if  possible,  and  at 
all  events  to  "  keep  the  popish  people  in  the  Church  ;"  and 
hence  its  double  interpretation  ; — its  "  iron  mixed  with  the  miry 
clay." 

The  Bishop  of  Connecticut,  in  his  recent  charge,  is  pleased  to 
draw  a  comparison  between  that  Prayer-Book  and  the  Bible 
alone,  as  a  standard  of  "faith  and  worship ;"  making  the  Prayer- 
Book,  in  spite  of  its  mongrel  origin,  and  its  motley  compromise 
between  the  Reformation  and  Popery — a  much  better  and  safer 
standard  than  the  Word  of  God !  He  commiserates  the  lot  of 
those  who  have  "  the  Bible  alone"  for  their  " only  standard  of 
faith"  as  being  possessed  of  no  "  sufficient  bond  of  union  and 
stability"  He  anticipates  for  them  nothing  but  division,  error, 
fanaticism,  and  "ignorance!"  He  contrasts  the  Episcopal 
Church  with  these,  as  being  surrounded  by  "  desolation  " — "  an 
Oasis  in  the  desert ;" — and  declares  that  this  happy  result  "  has 
been  mainly  effected  "  by  having  "  this  Book  of  Common  Prayer 

A  STANDARD  OF  FAITH  AND  WORSHIP  !" 

But  what  bond  of  union  and  stability  is  this  Prayer-Book  ? 
Never  were  schemes  more  diametrically  opposed,  each  so  justly 
drawn  and  so  logically  defended  from  the  same  standard  ;  and 
that  owing  to  the  worldly  and  wavering  policy  used  in  making 
it  up.  Indeed,  why  should  not  the  same  book  blow  hot  and 
cold  now  as  well  as  in  the  days  of  Q,ueen  Elizabeth  ?  Why 
should  it  not  be  able  to  "  keep  popish  people  in  the  Church," 
now  as  well  as  then?  See  what  diversities  are  existing — yes 
conflicting — under  this  bond  of  union  and  faith,  boasted  as  so 
much  better  than  the  Bible.  Mr.  Newman,  the  pillar  of  Oxford 
Tractarianism,  says,  that  "In  the  English  Church,  we  shall  hard- 
ly  find  ten  or  twenty  neighboring  clergymen  who  agree  together ; 
and  that  not  in  the  non-essentials  of  religion  ;  but  as  to  what  are 
its  elementary  and  necessary  doctrines,  or  whether  there  are  any 
necessary  doctrines  at  all;  any  distinct  and  definite  faith  required 
for  salvation."  Yet  all  make  their  appeal  to  the  Prayer-Book. 

Says  the  Bishop  of  Ohio,  "  What  the  articles  and  homilies  so 
distinctly  teach,  that  system"  [Tractarianism]  "  directly  denies  ; 
most  earnestly  condemns, — and  most  indignantly  casts  away" 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Bishop  of  New  Jersey  responds,  "  He  " 
[Pusey]  "  is  no  nearer,  on  my  word,  to  Rome,  than  the  Liturgy  and 
offices  of  the  Church  of  England  and  of  her  sister  in  America  go 
with  him" 

The  Bishop  of  Ohio  rejoins : — "  Their  mode  of  representing 
the  way  of  salvation  is  ANOTHER  GOSPEL  to  us ;  another  to  the 
Church  to  whose  doctrines  we  are  pledged" 


60  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

"  My  confidence  in  the  doctrinal  integrity  of  the  Oxford  writers 
continues  unshaken"  responds  the  Bishop  of  New  Jersey. 

"  The  difference,"  replies  Bishop  Macllvaine,  "  between  this 
divinity  and  the  true  divinity  for  which  our  Reformers  gave  them- 
selves to  death,  is  a  difference  of  great  VITAL  DOCTRINE  ;  not  one 
of  doctrine  merely,  but  of  the  SYSTEM  of  doctrine  from  corner- 
stone to  roof;  a  difference  which  makes  so  great  a  gulf  between, 
that  according  to  the  Oxford  divines  themselves,  it  makes  the  one 
side  or  the  other  ANOTHER  GOSPEL."  "  It  is  little  else  than  popery 
restrained, — essentially  Romish  divinity," — "  of  the  house  and 
lineage  of  popery."* 

It  is  plain  that  the  Prayer-Book  speaks  Popery  in  Maryland, 
and  Protestantism  in  Ohio  ; — according  to  the  authoritative  de- 
cision of  the  respective  heads  of  the  Church  in  those  Dioceses : 
while  as  Bishop  Brownell  describes  these  differences,  as  only 
"  slight  shades  of  difference  which  tincture  the  views  of  different 
members  of  our  household  of  faith" — the  same  book  should  seem 
to  teach  in  Connecticut  a  mongrel  theology  compounded  indif- 
ferently of  the  two. 

It  is  only  by  such  indifference  that  these  discordant  schemes 
can  ever  be  made  to  cease  their  conflict.  If  one  system  is  laid 
down  in  the  Articles,  it  is  no  less  plain  that  the  Offices  contain 
the  germ  and  essence  of  the  other ;  and  most  manfully  is  this 
maintained  and  triumphantly  established  by  those  who  hold  the 
system  of  the  Tractarians.  The  true  solution,  I  apprehend,  has 
been  given  in  the  origin  of  the  Offices,  and  in  the  policy  which 
made  them  what  they  are.  It  does  seem  that  in  the  providence 
of  God,  these  hot  contentions  are  allowed  to  rise,  as  if  in  solemn 
rebuke  of  the  presumption  which  has  dared  to  set  up  that  Prayer- 
Book — in  fact  as  an  idol — a  safer  bond  of  union  and  stability 
than  God's  own  holy  and  perfect  Word. 

That  the  Liturgy  was  framed  from  the  old  mass-books, 
whatever  reason  it  may  have  afforded  for  reprehension  at  the 
time,  is  at  the  present  day  no  manner  of  objection.  If  things 
are  good  in  themselves,  they  are  not  to  be  rejected  simply  because 
they  have  been  used  by  Rome.  If  there  were  attending  evils  at 
the  time,  there  was  at  least  this  advantage,  that  those  who  were 
enamored  of  Popery  would  be  less  offended  with  the  change, 
when  they  knew  that  so  much  of  that  to  which  they  had  been 
accustomed,  was  retained  in  the  Liturgy  which  they  were  now 
required  to  use. 

Nor  was  the  question  of  a  Liturgy  at  all  the  same  in  that  day 
with  what  it  is  at  present.  It  had  been  the  custom.  A  very 

*  And  yet  that  same  Bishop  in  a  fe\y  short  months  can  join  with  the  General 
Convention  in  a  thanksgiving,  that  all  is  so  united  and  regular  in  the  Episcopal 
Church. 


REIGN    OF    EDWARD    VI.  61 

large  majority  of  the  clergy  were  too  ignorant  to  conduct  public 
worship  without  one.  It  was  then,  as  it  is  at  present,  in  the 
English  Church,  that  no  practical  and  heartfelt  acquaintance 
with  vital  religion  was  a  requisite  qualification  for  one  who  was 
to  have  the  care  of  souls.  In  a  national  Church, — or  in  a  Church 
which  relies  on  Baptismal  regeneration,  and  gathers  its  mem- 
bers indiscriminately  by  "  street  rows"  or  parishes, — it  is  mani- 
fest that  an  attempt  to  require  such  qualifications  in  the  priesthood 
must  be  both  futile  and  absurd.  It  is  a  mercy  to  such  a  Church 
to  have  a  Liturgy.  But  in  Churches  founded  on  evangelical 
principles,  and  making  a  distinction  between  the  pious  and  the 
profane  in  gathering  their  members;  -in  Churches  where  in 
addition  to  the  gifts  of  nature  and  education,  the  gifts  of  grace 
are  also  required  in  the  ministry,  so  far  as  these  things  may  be 
determined  by  careful  scrutiny  ; — in  such  Churches  the  question 
of  Liturgy  assumes  another  form.  Our  most  intelligent  and 
devoted  Churches  have  not  found  themselves  either  shocked  or 
starved  by  the  us6  of  extemporary  prayer.  On  the  contrary, 
they  have  felt  that  their  devotions  were  more  satisfactorily  led ; 
and  their  varied  wants  and  thanksgivings  more  appropriately 
uttered.  Besides  this,  it  is  perhaps  one  of  the  very  best  available 
tests  and  safeguards  of  their  ministry,  that  their  ministers  are  to 
lead  the  devotions  of  God's  people  with  prayer  conceived  in  their 
own  hearts.  How  difficult  for  any  man  long  to  play  the  coun- 
terfeit here!  How  soon  the  leanness  of  the  minister's  heart 
appears  to  a  devout  and  spiritual  people  !  What  an  appalling 
barrier  to  such  as  do  not  love  to  pray,  and  who  have  not  acquired 
a  facility  of  leading  the  devotions  of  public  worship,  by  habits 
of  earnest  and  frequent  prayer  ! 

Aside  from  such  considerations,  and  from  the  considerations  of 
our  ever  varying  circumstances  and  wants,  the  question  of  wor- 
shipping God  with  or  without  a  Liturgy,  is  a  matter  of  taste  or  ex- 
pediency, concerning  which  individual  Churches  and  ministers 
should  be  left  free  to  adopt  their  own  course ;  rather  than  a 
question  of  principle  or  Obligation  about  which  Christians  should 
ever  contend. 

But  if  any  pretend  a  right  to  impose  a  Liturgy  upon  individual 
Churches  or  ministers,  that  right  we  deny.  We  know  no 
Catholic,  national,  provincial,  or  diocesan  authority,  which  has 
the  right  to  make  such  an  imposition.  We  question  both  the 
imposition  and  the  pretended  authority.  The  power  assumed  is 
a  usurpation  both  of  the  authority  of  God  and  of  the  rights  of 
man ;  and  the  thing  imposed  under  penalty  of  exclusion  from 
the  ministry,  of  excommunication — (and  in  the  case  of  the  Puri- 
tans, by  fines,  imprisonments,  or  banishment)  is  a  sheer  human 
invention.  With  our  Puritan  ancestors  we  deny  the  right 


62  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

of  any  human  authority  to  impose  rites,  ceremonies  and  Litur- 
gies, as  a  necessary  part  of  the  public  worship  of  God. 

if  an  appeal  be  made  to  antiquity,  as  though  we  had  aban- 
doned ancient  or  apostolic  usage ;  then  we  affirm,  1st,  that  the 
present  Liturgies  and  forms  make  no  pretence  to  Apostolical 
rise  or  institution ;  2d,  we  deny  that  a  Liturgy  at  all,  is  any- 
thing more  than  a  corruption  of  the  simplicity  of  primitive  and 
apostolic  times ;  and  3d,  we  affirm  that  the  liberty  is  perfect 
(even  if  the  duty  be  not  plain)  of  rejecting  all  imposed  rites  and 
ceremonies  for  the  worship  of  God,  which  are  not  ordered  by 
the  only  authoritative  rule,  his  holy  and  perfect  Word. 

The  authority  which  framed  and  imposed  the  English  Liturgy 
was  the  Council  and  Parliament :  the  STATE  AND  NOT  THE 
CHURCH.  It  was  not  laid  before  the  Convocation,  nor  any  repre- 
sentative body  of  the  clergy.  Its  origin  was  neither  Divine  nor 
Ecclesiastical. 

Uniformity  being  now  established  by  law,  and  rigidly  enforced, 
the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  authorities  set  themselves  to  the  fur- 
ther guarding  of  that  uniformity  and  to  the  suppression  of  alleged 
heresies.  The  dreadful  excess  of  the  Anabaptists  in  Germany,  had 
caused  their  very  name  to  be  regarded  with  alarm  and  horror  by  the 
governments  of  Europe.  In  the  previous  reign,  some  who  were 
charged  with  the  name  and  doctrines  of  Anabaptism,  were  seized 
and  burned  for  that  offence.  I  know  of  no  evidence  that  they 
were  justly  chargeable  with  the  impious  and  horrid  principles  of 
those  who  had  heretofore  been  known  by  the  name  of  Anabap- 
tists. They  might  have  been  simple-hearted  and  devout  Chris- 
tians, good  subjects ;  holding  only  the  peculiarities  of  the  present 
Baptists.  And  the  history  of  these  shows,  that  they  have,  as  a 
people,  ever  stood  for  religious  freedom,  and  for  the  Word  of 
God  alone  as  of  any  authority  in  matters  of  religion.  Though 
they  have  not  generally  shared  in  the  honor, — they  shared  largely 
in  the  perils  of  the  Reformation.  In  the  fundamental  principles 
of  their  creed,  in  their  worship  and  discipline,  and  in  their 
struggle  for  religious  and  civil  freedom,  they  too  were  among 
the  Puritans. 

People  of  this  persuasion  now  began  to  appear  in  some  num- 
bers in  England,  and  agreed  with  many  others  in  their  reluc- 
tance to  conform  to  the  established  ceremonies  and  Liturgy.  A 
commission  was  appointed  to  "  Examine  and  search  after  all 
Anabaptists,  heretics,  or  contemners  of  common  prayer,"  whom 
they  were  authorized,  if  they  could  not  reclaim  them,  to  excom- 
municate, imprison,  and  finally  to  deliver  them  to  the  secular 
arm.  In  what  respect  did  this  commission  differ  from  the 
Inquisition  ?  "  People  had  generally  thought,"  says  Neale  "that 


REIGN    OF    EDWARD    VI.  63 

all  the  Statutes  for  burning  had  been  repealed ;  but  they  were 
now  told  that  heretics  were  to  be  burned  by  the  common  law" 

How  strange,  that  such  good  men  as  Cranmer  and  his  co- 
adjutors could  ever  be  so  blinded  as  to  engage  in  such  cruelties  ! 
How  slowly  may  the  minds  even  of  good  men  come  to  the 
light !  and  how  long  it  takes  one  simple  principle^ — not  of  mercy 
and  compassion, — but  of  R.IGHT,  to  force  its  way  through  the 
opposing  prejudices  of  old  customs  and  old  opinions,  into  the 
general  conviction  of  the  wise  and  good ! 

It  has  been  alleged  against  Calvin, — and  many  have  delight- 
ed to  repeat  it, — that  "  Calvin  burnt  Servetus"  Calvin  did 
indeed  take  an  active  part  in  conducting  the  prosecution,  and 
Servetus  was  condemned, — not  simply  for  heresy,  nor  for  assaults 
upon  Christianity, — but  for  what  was  in  that  day  judged  to  be 
blasphemy, — in  that,  among  other  things,  he  had  called  One 
God  in  three  persons  a  Cerberus, — a  three-headed  monster.  The 
cantons  of  Berne,  Zurich  and  Shaff  hausen,  to  wliom  the  case 
was  referred,  replied  that  Servetus  should  be  punished.  The 
gentle  Melancthon  partook  so  much  of  the  error  of  the  times, 
as  to  approve  the  sentence  of  the  magistrate.  Farel  approved 
of  it.  Beza  defended  the  sentence.  When  the  court  of  Ge- 
neva pronounced  the  sentence  of  burning,  Calvin  earnestly 
and  importunately  begged  that  the  mode  of  punishment  might 
be  changed  to  a  milder  death  :  but  the  court  refused  to  yield. 

It  was  a  horrid  deed.  And  now  a  similar  one,  yet  more 
horrid  in  its  details,  is  to  be  recorded  of  that  pattern  of  meekness 
and  gentleness,  the  pure-minded  and  upright  Cranmer.  There 
was  a  woman  named  Joan  Bocher,  who  had  been  seized  as  an 
Anabaptist,  but  whose  only  crime  seemed  to  be  the  holding  of 
some  strange  but  harmless  notions  concerning  the  manner  of 
our  Lord's  incarnation.  To  us  her  notions  are  a  mere  confused 
jargon  ;  in  that  day  they  were  judged  heresy.  "  She  had  been 
known,"  says  Strype,  "  as  a  great  reader  of  the  Scriptures  her- 
self ;  which  book  she  dispersed  in  court." — "  she  used,  for  the 
more  secresy,  to  tie  the  books  with  strings  under  her  apparel, 
and  so  pass  with  them  into  court." — "  By  so  doing,  she  had 
jeoparded  her  life  to  bring  others  to  a  knowledge  of  God's 
Word."  But  neither  her  excellent  character  nor  her  devoted 
piety  could  save  her.  She  was  condemned  to  the  stake.  The 
king  thought  it  wrong  and  horrible.  He  refused  to  sign  her 
death-warrant.  Cranmer  was  deputed  by  the  council  to  over- 
come his  scruples.  The  youthful  king,  in  reverence  to  the 
authority  of  the  archbishop,  submitted  ;  but  with  tears  solemnly 
declared,  that  if  he  did  wrong,  since  it  was  in  submission  to 
Cranmer's  authority,  Cranmer  should  answer  it  to  God.  Even 
Cranmer  shuddered.  He  and  Ridley  took  the  woman  to  their 


64  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

houses,  and  tried  every  argument  to  induce  her  to  give  up  her 
opinions ;  but  after  nearly  a  year's  delay  she  was  committed  to 
the  flames.  One  other  person  and  only  one  suffered  in  this 
manner  during  this  reign.  Would  that  even  such  a  bloody 
record  might  never  have  stood  in  connection  with  such  venerable 
and  beloved  names ! 

Banner  and  Gardiner  refusing  to  discharge  the  duties  of  their 
bishoprics  according  to  the  new  order  of  things,  were  deprived ; 
and  afterwards,  for  political  offences,  imprisoned  ;  but  it  deserves 
to  be  recorded  that  not  one  single  Romanist  suffered  death  from 
the  hands  of  the  Reformers.  Cranmer  and  his  coadjutors  appear 
to  have  seen  at  length  the  horrid  wickedness  of  burning  people 
for  heresy ;  for  in  revising  the  Canon  law  under  act  of  Parlia- 
ment,— which  revision  was  mostly  by  the  hand  of  Cranmer — the 
punishment  of  death  was  no  longer  to  be  inflicted.  Even  then 
they  had  not  discovered  the  important  principle  that  no  human 
power  has  any  right  to  inflict  pains  or  penalties  for  such  alleged 
offences  ;  and  that  the  utmost  prerogative  of  the  Church,  is  to 
exclude  the  heretic  from  her  pale.  The  revised  law, — which, 
however,  never  took  effect,  the  king  dying  before  he  could  affix 
his  seal. — required  that  the  heretic  should  be  "  Declared  infamous, 
incapable  of  public  trust,  or  of  being  witness  in  any  court  or  of 
having  power  to  make  a  will."  Such  Was  the  light  of  those 
days. 

By  act  of  Parliament,  the  work  of  reforming  the  ORDINAL, — 
or  forms  for  ordaining  ministers, — was  given  into  the  hands  of 
six  Prelates  and  six  divines,  to  be  named  by  the  king,  and 
whatever  they  should  arrange  and  the  king  should  seal  with  the 
great  seal,  was  to  have  the  authority  of  law.  I  notice  the  author- 
ity by  which  this  was  done,  as  another  instance  of  the  way  in 
which  the  Reformation  was  carried  on,  and  in  which  the  entire 
service  book  was  framed  and  established.  It  was  not  by  the 
CHURCH,  but  by  the  KING  AND  PARLIAMENT.* 

In  the  revised  Ordinal,  such  offices  as  subdeacons,  readers, 
acolytes,  &c.,  were  dispensed  with ;  and  the  gloves,  the  sandals, 
the  mitre,  the  ring  and  the  crosier  were  left  out.  The  anointing, 
the  arraying  in  consecrated  vestments,  and  the  delivering  of  ves- 
sels for  consecrating  the  elements  in  the  Eucharist,  were  also 
omitted. 

*  Chapin,  in  his  "Primitive  Church"  has  a  chapter  entitled  "THE  ENGLISH 
REFORMATION  CANONICAL."  That  may  be  so,  for  aught  I  care  to  dispute, — and 
must  be  so,  if  it  be  "  Canonical"  for  the  church  to  be  the  mere  creature  of  the  State, 
and  to  suffer  the  civil  power  authoritatively  to  frame,  fix,  establish,  and  alter  at  its 
pleasure,  her  ceremonies  of  worship,  her  liturgy,  her  articles  of  faith  ;  and  then  to 
bind  the  Church  to  their  observance,  and  require  her  to  bind  all  her  children  to  the 
same.  If  this  be  not  Canonical,  then  it  is  simple  folly  to  talk  about  the  "  English 
Reformation"  as  "  CANONICAL." 


REIGN    OF    EDWARD  VI.  65 

The  Council  in  his  majesty's  name,  A.  D.  1550,  required  the 
Bishops  to  see  that  all  the  altars  in  the  churches  were  taken 
down,  and  a  communion  table  placed  in  their  room.  But  why 
this  alteration  ?  The  Reformers  gave  the  answer :  Because 
Christ  instituted  the  Sacrament  not  at  an  altar,  but  at  a  table : 
Because  the  Holy  Ghost  calls  it  "  The  Lord's  table,"  but  never 
an  altar :  because  the  altar, — in  its  name,  form,  and  very  idea, 
— implies  a  sacrifice,  and  the  people  have  been  superstitiously 
taught  to  regard  the  Sacrament  as  a  sacrifice,  a  propitiatory 
oblation  of  the  body  of  Christ,  for  the  sins  of  the  quick  and 
dead.  The  altar  thus  administers  to  a  gross  and  impious-idola- 
try :  many  of  the  people  actually  worshipping  a  breaden  god ; 
supposing  that  the  very  person,  soul,  and  divinity  of  Christ  are 
present  on  the  altar.  Why,  therefore,  should  there  be  any  longer 
an  altar  without  a  propitiatory  sacrifice,  by  a  sacerdotal  Priest  ? 
Let  us  return  to  the  truth,  to  the  Bible  form  and  name ;  let  us 
have  no  more  an  altar,  but  a  table.  What  want  we  of  an  altar, 
while  we  have  no  more  a  transubstantiation  ? 

We  have  now  come  to  the  period  which  marks  THE  RISE  OF 
THE  PURITANS.  While  so  many  things  were  struck  off  from 
the  ancient  forms  and  implements  of  superstition,  there  were 
several  other  appendages  of  Popery  which  those  who  held  the 
power  of  reforming  determined  still  to  preserve.  The  thing 
which  gave  the  first  occasion  to  a  debate  that  at  length  drew 
after  it  the  great  questions  of  religious  freedom  and  the  limits  of 
civil  or  ecclesiastical  power,  was  the  GARMENTS  OF  THE  PRIEST- 
HOOD :  apparently  a  small  matter,  but  involving  the  mightiest 
principles,  and  the  dearest  rights  that  concern  the  earthly  exist- 
ence of  man. 

*We  are  willing, — said  the  more  ardent  among  the  Reforming 
clergy, — to  wear  distinctive  garments  of  some  sort,  if  you 
please ; — anything  decent, — but  do  not  compel  us  to  wear  such 
regimentals  of  Popery,  as  will  by  the  people  be  regarded  a  badge 
of  the  popish  faith.  The  refusal  came  first  from  the  eloquent 
and  devoted  Hooper,  who  had  been  appointed  Bishop  of  Glou- 
cester, but  who  scrupled  whether  he  might,  in  conscience,  submit 
to  be  consecrated  in  popish  vestments.  The  martyr  Hooper  thus 
shares  with  Wickliffe  the  immortal  honor  of  being'  the  FATHER  OF 
THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS. 

The  reason  for  refusing  the  garments  was  the  same  as  for 
demolishing  the  altars.  The  garments  had  been  consecrated  by 
popish  mummeries,  and  were  supposed  to  possess  a  mysterious 
virtue,  like  holy  water, — which  mystic  virtue  imparted  a  sacred- 
ness  and  VALIDITY  to  the  acts  of  the  priest  who  wore  them.  In- 
deed, they  were  at  that  day  very  much  like  the  bishop's  hands, 
and  the  "  virtue"  that  is  by  full  grown  Puseyites  at  the  present 
5 


66  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

day,  supposed  to  flow  from  those  hands  by  the  mysterious  effi- 
ciency of  Apostolical  succession;  so  much  so  that  without  the 
consecrated  garments  a  priest  could  not  be  sure  that  the  neces- 
sary virtue  flowed  from  his  acts  to  make  them  valid.  Accord- 
ingly, when  Bishop  Latimerwas  clad  in  the  garments  in  order  to 
be  ceremoniously  divested  and  degraded  previously  to  his  being 
burne,d ; — as  soon  as  the  consecrated  robes  were  lorn  off  from 
him,  he  cried  out  in  derision,  "Now  I  can  make  no  more  holy 
water" 

John  Rogers,  the  proto-martyr  in  Queen  Mary's  reign,  per- 
emptorily refused  to  wear  the  garments,  unless  the  popish  priests 
were  enjoined  to  wear  upon  their  sleeves,  by  way  of  distinction. 
a  chalice  with  a  host.  When  Dr.  Taylor  was  clad  in  the  same 
preparatory  to  being  burned,  he  walked  about  saying,  "  How  say 
you,  my  lord,  am  I  not  a  goodly  fool  ?  If  I  were  in  Cheapside, 
would  not  the  boys  laugh  at  these  foolish  toys  and  apish  trum- 
pery ?"  And  when  the  surplice  was  pulled  off,  "  Now,"  says  he, 
"  I  am  rid  of  a  fool's  coat."  When  they  were  pulling  the  same 
off  from  Archbishop  Cranmer,  he  meekly  replied,  "  All  this 
needed  not :  I  myself  had  done  with  this  gear  long  ago." — 
[Neale.] 

Clad  in  these  robes,  the  priest  at  the  mass  was  considered 
(to  use  the  words  of  Challonar's  Catholic  Christian  Instructed) 
" as  Chris? s  Vicegerent-,  and  officiating  in  his  person"  The 
same  author  informs  us  that  the  Amice,  the  Alb,  the  girdle, 
the  maniple,  the  stole,  the  chasuble,  represent  the  cloth  with 
which  Christ's  face  was  muffled,  the  white  garment  in  which 
he  was  arrayed,  the  bands  with  which  he  was  fastened,  and  the 
purple  garment  which  was  put  on  him.  The  great  cross  on  the 
back  represents  the  cross  which  he  bore;  and  the  tonsure,  the 
crown  of  thorns.  Such  were  the  superstitions  and  corruptions 
with  which  the  priestly  garments  stood  connected.  Hooper 
thought  he  could  not  use  them  without  abetting  the  superstitions 
of  Popery.  Bucer  at  Cambridge,  and  Peter  Martyr  at  Oxford, 
to  whom  he  applied  for  advice,  declared  against  the  garments  as 
the  inventions  of  antichrist.  Most  of  the  Reforming  clergy 
agreed  with  Hooper  in  opinion.  Hooper  was  thrown  into  pri- 
son because  he  declined  being  made  a  bishop,  on  condition  of 
being  obliged  to  wear  the  garments.  Afterwards  a  compromise 
was  effected  ;  Hooper  consented  to  wear  the  robes  at  his  consecra- 
tion, and  when  he  preached  before  the  king  in  his  Cathedral, 
and  was  allowed  a  dispensation  at  other  times. 

King  Edward  was  now  rapidly  descending  to  the  grave.  The 
He  formers  could  do  no  more.  Six  years  only  had  been  allowed 
them  to  begin  the  work  of  Reformation,  when  the  Bloody  Mary 
ascended  the  throne  and  committed  them  to  the  flames. 


V. 


REIGN  OF  QUEEN  MARY. 

Her  duplicity.     Restoration  of  Popery.     Re-ordination  of  Clergymen  or- 
dained by  King  Edward's  Book.     Kingdom  reconciled  to  the  Pope. 

A  Puritan  Church  discj}y,ered  :  its  officers 


burned.     Exiles  at  Frankfort 

IT  is  now  290  years*  since  the  popish  Mary  came  to  the  crown 
of  England,  and  interrupted  the  fair  work  of  the  Reformers. 
Never  did  the  blasting  breath  of  the  Sirocco,  or  the  pestilence,  mark 
its  course  with  more  ample  tokens  of  its  destructive  power,  than 
that  brief  five  years'  reign  of  the  Bloody  Mary.  Six  years  only 
had  elapsed  since  the  death  of  Henry  VIII.  ;  six  years  only  were 
allowed  to  the  Reformers  to  effect  and  consolidate  the  Reforma- 
tion ;  five  years  more  brought  the  nation  back  into  the  chains  of 
Popery,  and  gave  the  long  list  of  Reformers  to  the  flames.  We 
can  hardly  bring  our  minds  to  admit  the  reality  that  these  things 
transpired  in  England  within  the  last  300  years. 

The  character  of  Mary  is  no  less  accurately  than  briefly  drawn 
in  the  words  of  the  historian  Hume  :  "  Mary  possessed  all  the 
qualities  fitted  to  compose  a  bigot  ;  and  her  extreme  ignorance 
rendered  her  utterly  incapable  of  doubt  in  her  own  belief,  or  in- 
dulgence to  the  opinions  of  others.  She  possessed  few  qualities 
either  estimable  or  amiable  ;  and  her  person  was  as  little  en- 
gaging as  her  behavior  and  address.  Obstinacy,  bigotry,  vio- 
lence, cruelty,  revenge,  tyranny,  every  circumstance  of  her  char- 
acter took  a  tincture  from  her  bad  temper  and  narrow  under- 
standing." To  this  we  may  add  that  she  most  conscientiously 
thought,  that  in  committing  the  Reformers  to  the  flames,  she 
was  doing  the  most  acceptable  service  to  God.- 

Her  reign  was  answerable  to  these  principles  and  this  descrip- 
tion. The  long  and  sickening  details  of  the  horrid  cruelties 
practised,  we  cannot  now  pursue  to  any  extent.  They  should 
however  be  read  and  pondered  ;  and  works  containing  the  his- 

*  1843. 


68  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

tory  in  extended  form  are  now  accessible  among  the  cheap  pub- 
lications of  the  day.* 

Mary  had  promised  that  she  would  make  no  alteration  in 
religion,  and  to  this  promise  she  was  in  no  small  measure  in- 
debted for  her  bloodless  succession  to  the  throne  in  opposition  to 
the  claims  of  Lady  Jane  Grey.  Upon  this  promise  the  men  of 
Suffolk  joined  her  standard,  and  at  once  decided  the  question. 
A  few  days  after  her  entrance  into  London,  she  declared  in 
Council,  that  though  her  conscience  was  settled  in  matters  of 
religion,  she  had  resolved  not  to  compel  others  but  by  the  preach- 
ing of  the  Word.  Within  one  week  from  that  day,  she  prohibited 
all  preaching  throughout  the  realm,  without  special  license. 

/'  It  was  easy  to  foresee,''  says  Hume,  "  that  none  but  Catholics 
ivould  be  favored  with  this  privilege."  The  men  of  Suffolk  took 
the  alarm  ;  and  presuming  upon  their  services,  sent  a  deputation 
to  represent  their  grievances;  but  the  queen  rebuked  their  inso- 
lence ;  and  one  of  them  venturing  to  speak  of  her  promise,  he 
was  "  put  in  the  pillory  for  three  days  together  and  deprived  of 
his  ears."  In  three  days  more,  the  popish  bishops,  Bonner,  Gardi- 
ner, Tonstal  and  others,  were  reinstated  in  their  sees.  Hooper, 
*  Coverdale,  Taylor,  and  Rogers,  were  taken  into  custody.  Within 
a  fortnight  more,  Cranmer  and  Latimer  were  sent  to  the  Tower. 
The  storm  gathered  thick  and  fast:  many  hundreds  of  the  clergy 
and  principal  men  fled  beyond  sea  :  among  whom  were  Samp- 
son, Sandys,  Reynolds,  Knox  the  reformer  of  Scotland,  Fox  the 
martyrologist,  and  Grindal  and  Jewell,  afterwards  archbishops. 

The  popish  priests  began  to  celebrate  mass  in  the  churches 
where  they  had  control.  The  Protestant  ministers  and  churches 
began  to  be  openly  insulted  and  hindered  in  their  worship.  A 
Judge  Hales,  who  ventured  to  govern  his  conduct  by  the  unre- 
pealed  laws  of  the  realm,  rather  than  according  to  what  he  might 
have  conjectured  to  be  the  pleasure  of  the  queen,  was  fined  a 
ruinous  sum,  and  by  rough  treatment  driven  to  distraction  and 
suicide. 

Two  months  had  not  quite  elapsed  when  the  queen  was 
crowned  by  Gardiner,  attended  by  ten  bishops,  all  in  their  mitres, 
copes  and  crosiers,  though  contrary  to  law.  Ten  days  after,  the 
parliament  was  opened  by  a  Mass  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the 
Latin  tongue,  celebrated  by  both  houses,  with  all  the  ancient 
ceremonies,  though  forbidden  by  law. 

The   service  book  of  King  Edward  was  abolished.     All  his 

V    laws  for  the  reforming  of  public  worship  were  repealed.     In 

little  more  than  four  months  from  the  queen's  accession,  the  old 

*"  Fox's  Book  of  Martyrs"  is  among  these  cheap  publications,  in  which  authen- 
tic accounts  are  found  in  full  detail.  "  The  Days  of  Queen  Mary,"  prepared  by  the 
London  Tract  Society,  has  recently  been  re-published  in  cheap  form  in  this  country. 


REIGN  OF  QUEEN  MARY.  69 

Romish  service  in  Latin  was  by  law  resumed  throughout  the 
realm.  Severe  laws  were  made  against  all  who  should  treat  the 
Mass  with  irreverence ;  and  it  was  made  felony  for  more  than 
twelve  persons  to  assemble  together  with  an  intent  to  alter  the 
religion  established  by  law.  The  Convocation  met  with  Bonner 
in  the  chair ;  and  all  who  had  a  right  to  sit,  save  six,  subscribed 
the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 

The  queen  now  issued  her  orders,  directing  all  the  ceremonies, 
holidays,  and  feasts  of  King  Henry's  time  to  be  revoked.  Those 
clergymen  who  had  been  ordained  by  the  late  service  book,  were 
to  be  re-ordained  ;  and  all  people  compelled  to  come  to  church. 
"  The  Mass,"  says  Neale,  "  was  set  up  in  all  places  ;  and  the  old 
popish  ceremonies  revived.  The  carvers  and  makers  of  statues 
had  a  quick  trade  for  roods  and  other  images  that  were  to  be  set 
up  in  the  churches.  The  most  eminent  preachers  were  already 
under  confinement,  and  about  three  thousand  more  were  in  this 
visitation  deprived." 

Cardinal  Pole  was  by  this  time  come  from  Rome  as  Legate 
of  the  Pope,  with  power  to  receive  the  kingdom  once  more  into 
the  bosom  of  the  Catholic  Church.  The  parliament  drew  up 
a  supplication  to  Mary  and  her  husband,  Philip  of  Spain,  to  in- 
tercede with  the  legate  of  his  holiness  that  England  might  be 
graciously  pardoned  the  damnable  offence  of  departing  from 
Rome.  This  intercession  the  legate  kindly  admitted  ;  and 
sitting  covered,  with  the  lords  and  commons  kneeling  before  him, 
he  mercifully  granted  a  full  absolution  ;  only  enjoining  as  a 
penance  that  they  should  repeal  all  laws  passed  against  Roman- 
ism. This  being  done,  all  proceeded  to  the  chancel,  and  with 
great  joy  sung  praise  to  God  for  such  singular  mercy.  One  man 
in  parliament,  and  only  one,  refused  to  kneel  before  this  deputy 
of  a  foreign  priest;  and  that  man  was  Sir  Ralph  Bagnel ;  a 
name,  for  this  alone,  worthy  of  lasting  honor. 

The  kingdom  being  now  restored  to  the  Papacy,  the  next 
thing  to  be  done  was  to  take  care  of  the  Reformers.  It  has  been 
the  uniform  custom  of  Rome,  wherever  she  has  had  the  power, — 
whenever  a  Reformation  has  broken  out  within  her  pale,  to  over- 
whelm the  rising  movement  in  blood.  "  Drunken  with  the 
blood  of  the  saints,"  has  been  her  true  description  from  age  to 
age.  The  Inquisitions  of  Spain  ; — those  dungeons  of  secresy 
and  torture,  the  sighing  and  tears  and  blood  of  whose  victims  will 
never  be  fully  revealed  till  the  Day  of  Judgment; — the  Cru- 
sades against  the  Christians  of  Piedmont ; — the  dragooning 
of  the  Huguenots  and  the  massacre  of  the  Protestants  on 
St.  Bartholomew's  day  in  France  ; — these  things  have  marked 
her  character  in  all  countries  and  all  ages.  It  is  her  boast 
to  be  infallible — never  to  err  and  never  to  change.  One  of 


70  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

her  modern  catechisms  (I  quote  from  the  "  Days  of  Queen 
Mary,"  by  the  London  Tract  Society)  uses  the  following 
language :  "  It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  heretics  and  schismatics, 
because  they  have  revolted  from  the  Church  (for  they  no 
more  belong  to  it  than  deserters  do  to  the  army  which  they 
have  abandoned),  it  is  not  however  to  be  denied  that  they 
are  in  the  power  of  the  Church  as  persons  who  may  be  PUNISHED, 
and  doomed  by  ANATHEMA  TO  DAMNATION."  Pope  Pius  VII., 
in  A.  D.  1805,  writing  his  nuncio  in  Vienna,  says  :  "  We  have 
fallen  on  times  so  calamitous  and  humiliating  to  the  spouse  of 
Jesus  Christ,  that  it  is  not  possible  for  her  to  practise,  nor  expe- 
dient for  her  to  recall  so  holy  maxims  ;  and  she  is  FORCED  to 
interrupt  the  course  of  her  JUST  SEVERITIES  against  the  enemies 
of  the  faith." 

Rome  now  had  the  power  once  more  in  her  own  hands ;  and 
England  was  at  her  mercy.  The  old  sanguinary  laws  against 
dissenters  from  her  faith  and  worship  were  restored  in  all  their 
severity.  Henry  VIII.,  though  a  bloody  monster,  who  never 
hesitated  to  burn  such  as  he  judged  to  be  heretics, — had  yet 
made  a  merciful  alteration  in  the  laws.  No  person  was  any 
longer  to  be  seized  and  imprisoned,  or  doomed  to  death,  at  the 
mere  pleasure  of  an  ecclesiastic.  The  civil  power  was  required 
to  concur.  The  accused  was  to  be  condemned  only  by  a  course 
of  law,  and  upon  the  verdict  of  a  jury.  The  ecclesiastical  au- 
thorities were  now  once  more  empowered  to  seize  any  person, 
and  confine  him,  without  trial,  at  their  pleasure,  in  prisons  wholly 
under  their  own  control.  Such  prisons  the  Bishops  had,  and 
they  used  them  without  rnercy.  When  the  prisoner  was  brought 
forth,  it  was  not  to  stand  before  the  tribunals  of  law,  but  before 
mere  arbitrary  prelates,  whose  law  was  their  caprice.  He  was 
not  allowed  the  privileges  granted  to  the  most  atrocious  criminal. 
"  There  was  no  jury  to  decide  ;  no  judge  humanely  examining 
the  evidence  brought  forward  by  the  accuser ;  no  counsel  to 
advise,  or  to  make  such  inquiries  as  the  case  suggested ;  no 
friends  whose  presence  might  show  the  poor  prisoner  that  there 
were  some  to  sympathize  in  his  fate.  There  was  no  open  ex- 
amination of  witnesses ;  nor  was  the  prisoner  allowed  to  call  for 
persons  whose  testimony  might  disprove  the  accusation  against 
him."  I  have  taken  these  last  sentences  from  "  the  Days  of 
Queen  Mary,"  by  the  London  Tract  Society;  and  a  better  general 
description  of  these  scenes  cannot  be  given,  than  that  given  by  the 
same  tract  in  the  following  words :  "  After  enduring  an  arbitrary 
imprisonment,  generally  in  a  loathsome  dungeon,  loaded  with 
fetters,  debarred  from  the  necessaries  of  life, — view  the  prisoner, 
enfeebled  with  long  confinement,  brought  before  the  cruel  and 
iniquitous  Bonner, — or  some  one  of  like  spirit, — whenever  his 


REIGN  OF  QUEEN  MARY.  71 

judge  was  pleased  to  summon  him,  and  commonly  without  any 
previous  notice." — "  View  him  received  with  taunts  and  revil- 
ings,  commanded  to  hear  accusations  brought  forward  by  some 
secret  enemy  ;  not  permitted  to  disprove  any  calumnies  with 
which  he  might  be  charged,  but  required  to  '  turn  or  burn.'  " — 
"  The  judge  might  perhaps  remand  him  for  a  short  interval,  or 
even  try  to  work  upon  him  by  false  professions  of  kindness  ; 
but  when  these  efforts  proved  fruitless,  his  end  was  certain.  He 
was  condemned,  and  sent  to  the  stake,  probably  within  a  few 
hours,  '  there  to  be  burned  alive,  often  with  protracted  sufferings, 
subjected  to  insults  and  violence  from  ignorant,  bigoted  individu- 
als, who  were  taught  to  believe  that  such  proceedings  were 
acceptable  to  a  just  and  holy  God.'  " — "  The  martyr  suffered  not 
in  his  own  person  only." — "  When  called  upon  to  give  the  short 
and  important  answer,  which  would  seal  his  fate,  he  knew  that 
every  member  of  his  family  would  have  to  share  the  bitter  cup 
of  persecution.  Already  the  beloved  of  his  soul  were  pining  at 
home,  supported  only  by  the  scanty  remnants  of  the  earnings  of 
his  former  industry,  or  dependent  on  the  charity  of  others,  about 
to  be  cast  helpless  upon  the  world,  doomed  to  bear  the  disgrace 
which  would  be  attached  to  his  name  by  a  cruel  and  hard- 
hearted generation." 

General  statements,  however,  never  strike  the  mind  like  the 
detailed  history  of  individuals.  No  one's  imagination  will  fill 
up  the  outline  given  in  this  meagre  general  description.  To 
obtain  a  just  conception  of  these  cruelties,  one  must  read  the 
simple  narratives  of  the  martyrologists.  He  must  see  the  inhu- 
man Bonner,  tearing  the  hair,  and  lacerating  the  faces  of  the 
victims,  who  have  been  dragged  from  a  long  and  dreary  confine- 
ment in  the  prison  which  has  received  the  name  of  Bonner's  coal- 
house.  He  must,  see  that  bloodthirsty  bishop  holding  the  hand  of 
the  humble  Tompkins  in  the  flame  of  a  lamp,  till  the  sinews  shrink 
and  the  blood  spurts  forth  into  the  faces  of  those  who  stand  by. 
He  must  read  the  details  of  Rogers'  imprisonment ;  and  see  him  led 
to  the  stake  forbidden  even  to  say  farewell  to  his  wife  and  nume- 
rous family  of  children,  who  have  come  out,  if  possible,  to  take 
their  last  view  of  him  on  his  way  to  execution.  He  must  see 
Hooper,  with  green  faggots  piled  around  him,  in  a  lowering 
morning,  while  the  high  wind  blows  the  scanty  flame  away 
from  his  body ;  and  the  fire,  for  a  long  time,  reaches  only  his 
extremities,  and  when  this  nearly  dies  away,  we  must  see  him 
with  his  hand  wiping  the  sweat  of  agony  from  his  face,  and 
mildly  but  earnestly  entreating  that  more  fire  may  be  kindled  ; — 
and  then  continuing  praying,  till  the  operators  see  him  "  black 
in  the  mouth,"  and  his  tongue  so  swollen  that  he  cannot  speak ; 
yet  his  lips  moving  till  they  shrink  from  the  gums ;  and  he 


72  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

smiting  his  breast,  till  one  of  his  arms  falls  off  in  the  fire  ;  and 
then  continuing  knocking  with  the  other,  while  "  the  fat.  and 
water  and  blood,  drop  out  at  his  linger  ends  ;'•  we  must 
stand  by  him  till  the  fire  has  been  replenished  the  third  time  ; 
and  that  hand  at  last  cleaves  fast  to  the  hot  iron  upon  his 
breast ; — and  he  falls  over  his  chain,  and  expires. 

From  witnessing  such  burnings  as  these,  he  who  would  be- 
come acquainted  with  the  sorrows  of  the  martyrs,  must  go  to 
the  Lollards'  tower,  and  elsewhere,  to  see  the  prisoners.  He 
must  see  them  with  their  feet  or  hands  in  the  stocks  :  or  fastened 
in  some  torturing  posture,  pining  away  the  weeks  and  months 
in  famine,  cold,  and  darkness.  As  these  prisoners  are  dragged 
to  the  stake,  he  must  see  little  children  following  a  beloved 
father,  and  begging  with  cries  of  distraction  that  they  may  be 
burned  with  him.  But  I  will  not — I  cannot  dwell  further  upon 
these  horrid  details. 

Let  us  pass  to  the  things  in  Queen  Mary's  reign,  which  more 
appropriately  relate  to  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  Puritans. 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  multitudes  of  pious  and 
enlightened  people  in  the  land,  could,  in  these  times  of  distress 
and  terror,  rest  satisfied  with  the  idolatrous  rites  of  Popery. 
Kindred  spirits  would  meet  together,  to  pour  their  sorrows  into 
each  other's  bosoms,  and  to  pour  out  their  complaints  unto  God. 
There  were  accordingly  many  secret  congregations  assembling 
in  private  houses,  in  the  fields,  or  on  board  ships,  or  wherever 
they  might  find  a  place  sufficiently  concealed.  Here  we  begin 
to  observe  how  uniformly  Christian  people,  when  they  are  cut 
loose  from  human  forms  and  restraints,  and  left  to  adopt  for 
themselves  such  organization  and  order  as  simple  piety  finds  in 
the  light  of  nature  and  of  God's  Word,  resort  to  the  simple 
worship  and  discipline  of  Puritanism.  Such  were  the  princi- 
ples laid  down  by  Wickliffe.  Such,  of  necessity,  was  the  wor- 
ship of  the  Lollards.  Such  must  have  been  the  worship  and 
discipline  of  those  congregations  who  are  mentioned  as  meeting 
secretly  for  worship  daring  the  reigns  of  the  Henrys,  the  Seventh 
and  Eighth  ;  which  congregations  were,  in  all  probability,  but  the 
descendants  and  the  successors  of  the  early  followers  of  Wickliffe. 
Such  was  the  case  with  the  pious  men  and  women  who  gath- 
ered secretly  for  the  enjoyment  of  the  worship  and  ordinances 
of  pure  religion,  in  the  days  of  the  Bloody  Mary.  "  There 
were  several  congregations."  says  Neale,  "  up  and  down  the 
country,  which  met  together  in  the  night,  and  in  secret  places, 
to  cover  themselves  from  the  notice  of  their  persecutors.  Great 
numbers  in  Suffolk  and  Essex  constantly  frequented  the  private 
assemblies  of  the  Gospellers,  and  came  not  at  all  to  the  pub- 
lic service ;  but  the  most  considerable  congregation  was  in  and 


REIGN  OF  QUEEN  MARY.  73 

about  London.  It  was  formed  soon  after  Queen  Mary's  ac- 
cession, and  consisted  of  above  two  hundred  members." 

A  seizure  was  made  of  Mr.  Rough,  who  had  been  "  elected" 
minister  of  this  Church,  and  of  Outhbert  Sympson,  their  deacon, 
who  kept  a  book  containing  the  names  and  accounts  of  the 
congregation.  This,  then,  was  a  Congregational  Church,  with 
its  minister  and  deacon,  "  elected"  by  the  people.  The  Church 
of  England  knows  no  such  popular  election  ;  it  has  no  perma- 
nent unpreaching  deacon,  the  officer  of  a  particular  Church.  In 
spite  of  their  familiarity  with  the  prelatical  organizations,  these 
pious  people  who  met  to  worship  God  at  the  hazard  of  their 
lives,  were  no  sooner  left  to  themselves,  to  the  Bible  and  to 
nature,  than  the  path  was  open  and  plain.  They  were  led  at 
once  to  the  simple  worship,  discipline  and  organization,  so 
manifestly  used  in  apostolic  times  ;  and  afterwards  so  faithfully 
copied  by  our  Pilgrim  Fathers. 

To  test  a  principle,  I  would  fain  ask  those  who  talk  so  much 
about  Apostolic  succession,  and  the  sin  of  schism,  while  they 
maintain  the  Church  of  Rome  a  true  Church,  and  her  Priests  and 
Bishops  to  be  ministers  of  the  true  Apostolic  succession; — I 
would  fain  ask  these,  Of  what  sin  were  these  pious  men  and 
women  guilty,  when  they  met  in  secret  places  to  worship  God, 
in  the  reign  of  the  Bloody  Mary  ?  Lay  your  hand  upon  your 
heart  and  tell  me  which  was  the  true  Church,  and  with  which 
was  a  true  disciple  of  Christ  to  meet  and  worship ;  with  which 
should  he  join  in  breaking  the  bread  of  the  communion  of  the 
body  of  our  Lord  ? — With  those  devout  people  who  met  in 
secret,  or  with  those  who  hunted  them  for  their  lives  ?  Tell  me, 
where  does  your  soul  go  ?  Where  does  the  Word  of  God 
bid  you  go  ?  With  Christ's  truth  and  people,  or  with  a  wicked 
murderous  succession,  who  have  abandoned  Christ's  truth,  and 
are  persecuting  his  people  to  death  ?  Suppose  those  times  of 
darkness  had  continued  for  some  centuries, — as  they  did  con- 
tinue over  the  Christian  valleys  of  Piedmont, — might  these 
Christians  never  meet  to  worship  God  or  to  enjoy  his  ordinances  ? 
Are  they  still  bound  to  that  "  Succession,  of  atheistical,  heathen- 
ish, bloody  monsters  wearing  mitres,  whose  constant  work  it  is 
to  torture  and  destroy  the  disciples  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  ? 
Are  they  still  helplessly  dependent — from  generation  to  genera- 
tion— upon  those  debauchees,  infidels,  and  murderers,  for  the 
bread  of  life  ?  Tell  me, — When  the  Succession  abandons 
Christ  and  his  truth,  which  shall  we  follow;  Christ  and  his 
truth  ;  or  a  lying  and  heathenish  succession  ?  If  there  be  schism 
at  such  a  time,  who  is  the  true  schismatic,  the  simple  Christian 
who  cleaves  to  Christ  and  his  truth,  or  the  mitred  prelate  who 
departs  from  both  ?  Whatever  be  the  doctrine  of  Prelatists  on 


74  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

this  point,  the  doctrine  of  the  Word  of  God  is  too  plain  to  be 
misapprehended ;  "  Though  WE,  or  an  ANGEL  FROM  HEAVEN, 
preach  any  other  gospel  unto  you  than  that  which  we  have  preached 
unto  you,  let  him  be  accursed."  If  we  must  follow  GOD'S  TRUTH 
rather  than  an  APOSTLE  or  an  ANGEL  FROM  HEAVEN  ;  how  much 
more  must  we  abide  by  the  truth,  rather  than  by  a  persecuting 
murderous  teacher  of  falsehood^  even  though  he  should  wear  a 
mitre,  and  claim  to  be  official  successor  of  the  Apostles  ? 

These  pious  brethren  continued  to  assemble  wherever  they  could 
hope  to  escape  the  bishop's  spies  ;  till  at  length  a  false  brother, 
who  perhaps  had  joined  them  for  the  purpose  of  treachery,  be- 
trayed them.  The  minister,  the  deacon  and  many  others  were 
seized.  Sympson  was  put  upon  the  rack  three  times  in  one  day, 
because  he  would  neither  discover  the  register  of  the  Church,  nor 
the  names  of  its  members.  He  was  sent  to  Bonner.  "  You  see," 
said  Bonner  to  the  spectators,  "  what  a  personable  man  this  is  ;  and 
for  his  patience,  if  he  was  not  a  heretic,  I  should  much  commend 
him  ;  for  he  has  been  three  times  racked  in  one  day,  and  in  my 
house  has  endured  some  sorrow,  and  yet  I  never  saw  his  pa- 
tience moved."  Sympson,  Rough)  and  others  of  the  congregation 
ended  their  lives  in  the  flames. 

The  exiles  at  Frankfort  also  organized  themselves  into  a 
Congregational  Church,  electing  their  ministers  and  deacons. 
Deliberately  considering  the  order  of  worship  to  be  used,  they 
laid  aside  the  litany,  the  surplice,  the  responses,  and  many  things 
in  the  communion  service.  The  order  of  their  worship  was  first 
a  prayer,  then  a  psalm,  a  prayer,  a  sermon,  a  prayer,  at  the  close 
of  which  was  joined  the  Lord's  prayer,  a  rehearsal  of  the  articles 
of  belief,  a  psalm,  and  last  the  benediction.  "  Other  exiles  set 
up  another  Church  of  like  descriptions  at  Embden  in  East  Fries- 
land  ;  others  did  the  same  at  Wesel  in  Westphalia."  [Prince, 
N.  England  Chronology.] 

The  exiles  were  not,  however,  in  all  places  of  the  same  mind. 
The  Church  at  Frankfort  sending  to  certain  divines  at  Strasburg 
to  come  to  their  aid  and  ministry,  these  refused  except  on  condi- 
tion that  the  Church  should  restore  the  Liturgy.  The  Church  at 
Frankfort  refused,  saying  that  the  Liturgy  had  been  altered  in  King 
Edward's  time  as  far  as  circumstances  would  permit,  and  that 
"  If  God  had  not  in  these  wicked  days  hindered  it  by  his  Provi- 
dence, they  would  have  altered  more ; — and  in  our  case,"  said 
they,  "  we  doubt  not  but  they  would  have  done  as  we  do." 
The  Strasburg  divines  urging  a  compliance,  the  Church  gave 
their  decided  answer  in  the  negative.  This  answer  was  signed 
in  behalf  of  the  Church,  by  John  Knox,  the  famous  Reformer  of 
Scotland,  by  Fox  the  martyrologist,  and  by  several  more. 

In  this  juncture,  willing  to  receive  light,  and  wishing  to  fol- 
low the  path  of  duty,  the  Church  resolved  to  ask  advice  of  Calvin, 


& 


REIGN  OF  QUEEN  MARY.  75 

who  was  at  that  day  in  the  highest  repute  in  England  and 
throughout  all  countries  where  the  Reformation  had  extended. 
Calvin  having  carefully  examined  the  Prayer-Book,  gave  it  as  his 
opinion,  that  "  There  were  many  endurable  weaknesses  in  it ; 
which,  because  at  first  they  could  not  be  amended,  were  to  be 
suffered.  But  it  behooved  grave  and  godly  ministers  of  Christ 
to  enterprise  further,  and  set  up  something  more  filed  from  rust, 
and  purer.  If  religion  had  flourished  till  this  day  in  England, 
many  of  these  things  would  have  been  reformed.  But  since  the 
Reformation  is  overthrown,  and  a  Church  is  to  be  set  up  in 
another  place,  where  you  are  at  liberty  to  establish  what  order 
is  most  for  edification,  /  cannot  tell  what  they  mean  who  are  so 
fond  of  the  leavings  of  popish  dregs" 

The  next  year  brought  Dr.  Cox  to  Frankfort,  who  broke  through 
the  order  established  in  the  Church,  created  a  great  disturbance, 
arid  caused  Knox  to  be  accused  of  high  treason  against  the  em- 
peror, on  account  of  some  expressions  in  a  book  which  Knox 
had  some  years  before  published  in  English,  in  which  he  had 
said  that  the  emperor  was  not  less  an  enemy  to  Christ  than  Nero. 
The  magistrates,  fearful  of  difficulty  with  the  emperor,  desired 
Knox  to  leave  the  city.  The  party  of  Cox,  now  strengthened  by 
accessions  from  abroad,  set  up  the  Liturgy,  and  organized  the 
church  anew.  Most  of  the  old  congregation  left  the  city.  It  is 
remarkable  that  the  new  church,  made  up  of  men  so  strenuous 
for  the  Liturgy,  gave  the  very  first  exhibition  of  a  conflict  between 
the  clergy  and  the  people,  as  to  where  lies  the  power  of  ultimate 
appeal ;  whether  in  the  clergy  or  in  the  brethren  of  the  church. 
The  rector  summoned  one  of  the  members  to  appear  at  the  ves- 
try before  the  officers  of  the  church.  The  member  appealed  to 
the  body  of  the  church,  who  ordered  the  cause  to  be  brought  before 
them.  The  rector  and  officers  chose  rather  to  resign  than  to  ad- 
mit these  rights  of  the  church.  The  church  maintained  their 
ground,  and  formally  determined  that "  In  all  controversies  among 
themselves,  and  especially  in  cases  of  appeal,  the  last  resort 
should  be  in  the  church." 

Such  was  the  strange  issue  of  the  contentions  at  Frankfort. 
Those  who  had  strenuously  opposed  the  Liturgy,  went  and  sub- 
mitted themselves  to  the  Presbyterian  discipline  at  Geneva. 
Those  who  had  been  ready  to  turn  everything  upside  down  for 
a  Liturgy,  remained  and  asserted  the  strongest  principle  of  Con~ 
gregationalism.  So  gradually  dawned  the  light.  So  surely  does 
abuse  of  power  teach  the  injured  their  rights.  Discussion — and 
even  dissension — is  made  to  lead  to  the  discovery  of  truth.  Old 
principles,  though  established  in  ancient  precedents  and  ratified 
by  law,  are  sifted.  What  can  be  shaken  is  laid  aside.  Truth 
is  eternal ;  its  opposers  are  mortal.  Contests  may  await  it ; 
times  of  declension  may  leave  it  for  a  season  depressed  and  ob- 


76  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

scured;  but  in  spite  of  all  it  holds  on  its  way  ;  commending  itself 
to  right  reason  ;  approving  itself  always  simple  and  glorious  ;  the 
friend  of  freedom,  of  knowledge,  and  religion  ;  till  at  last  it  is  es- 
tablished, never  to  be  overthrown.  Though  angry  controversy  in 
trivial  matters  is  always  to  be  deprecated,  I  cannot  be  of  the 
opinion  of  those  who  dread  the  issue  of  a  temperate  though  ear- 
nest discussion  of  questions  lying  at  the  foundation  of  the  great 
matters  of  truth  and  order,  and  of  human  rights.  I  know  not  to 
what  stagnation  and  tyranny  the  world  and  the  Church  would 
have  been  given  over,  but  for  such  conflicts  of  principle.  Cer- 
tain it  is,  that  whatever  evils  may  have  resulted  from  such  con- 
flicts, much  darkness  and  much  corruption  would  have  encum- 
bered the  Church  without  them;  much  that  is  fairest  in  truth  would 
never  have  been  discovered,  or  being  discovered,  would  have 
been  undervalued  and  of  little  use.  "  There  must  be  heresies," 
says  an  Apostle,  "  that  they  which  are  approved  may  be  made 
manifest  among  you."  There  must  be  discussion — perhaps  at 
times  dissension — that  what  is  true  and  useful  and  important 
may  be  made  known.  Only  it  should  be  remembered  that  truth 
and  duty — not  party  ends  nor  party  spirit — should  govern  the  dis- 
cussion ;  for  "  The  wrath  of  man  worketh  not  the  righteousness 
of  God."  Save  for  the  conflicts  of  Puritanism,  freedom  would 
never  have  been  known  ;  and  a  sort  of  religion  scarcely  in  ad- 
vance of  Romanism  would  have  reigned  unbroken  in  England, 
if  not  throughout  the  Christian  world. 

But  these  heats  of  controversy  between  those  who  had  for 
conscience  sake  fled  from  their  native  land,  could  not  last  for 
ever.  These  were  transient  fires ;  the  principle  of  love  was  deep 
seated  within  them,  an  unquenchable  flame.  The  short  reign 
of  Mary  had  not  passed  away,  before  these  grudges  seemed 
nearly  forgotten.  In  this  respect  the  "  sun  "  did  not  "  go  down 
upon  their  wrath."  Letters  of  mutual  esteem  and  love  passed 
between  the  exiles  of  Geneva  and  those  of  Frankfort.  With  the 
accession  of  Elizabeth  all  promised  to  forget  their  former  dis- 
pleasure, and  to  strive  together  for  a  further  reform.  "  We  trust," 
said  those  who  had  been  so  strenuous  for  the  Prayer-Book,  "  that 
true  religion  shall  be  restored,  and  that  we  shall  not  be  burdened 
with  unprofitable  ceremonies.  And  if  any  shall  be  obtruded 
that  shall  be  offensive  at  our  meeting  in  England, — which  we 
trust  will  be  shortly, — we  will  brotherly  join  with  you  to  be 
suitors  for  the  reformation  and  abolishing  of  the  same."  "  And 
I  find,"  says  Prince,  in  his  N.  England  Chronology,  "  that  soon 
returning  to  England  they  were  as  good  as  their  word." 

Having  seen  Puritanism  in  its  first  endurance  of  suffering,  we 
come  now  to  view  it  in  its  activity,  girding  itself  for  its  first  en- 
counters with  the  spirit  of  formalism  and  despotism  in  the  long 
and  rigid  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 


VI 


QUEEN  ELIZABETH. 

Reformation  conducted  on  principles  of  State  policy.  Papists  to  be  kept 
in  the  Church.  High  Commission.  Things  offensive  to  Papists  stricken 
out  of  the  Liturgy.  Plan  of  keeping  Papists  in  the-€hurch  successful. 
Foresight  of  the  Puritans.  Their  predictions  verified.  Original  -ernn- 
plaints  of  the  Puritans.  ProgressjjL  their  i 


THE  accession  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  17th  November,  A.D.  1558, 
was  regarded  by  all  parties  as  the  signal  for  a  return  from  Popery 
to  the  Reformation.  There  were  circumstances,  however,  which 
rendered  it  difficult  to  make  the  change  either  sudden  or  com- 
plete, had  the  queen  ever  so  heartily  desired  it.  The  offices  of 
the  Church  were  filled  with  popish  bishops  and  popish  priests. 
A  large  share  of  the  people  were  still  popish.  The  Pope  had 
pronounced  the  queen  illegitimate,  and  incapable  of  inheriting 
the  throne.  In  the  failure  of  Elizabeth,  Mary  Queen  of  Scots 
was  the  undoubted  heir,  and  both  she  and  the  popish  sovereigns 
wanted  only  a  favorable  opportunity  to  assert  her  title  to  the  throne. 

Elizabeth  saw  the  difficulties  of  her  situation,  and  was  too 
politic  to  risk  any  commotions  by  attempting  too  sudden  or  too 
wide  a  departure  from  the  rituals  then  in  use.  This  caution 
arose  from  a  due  survey  of  the  dangers,  and  was  deliberately 
made  the  rule  of  the  policy  to  be  pursued.  Maddox,  who,  a 
hundred  years  ago,  attempted  to  justify  her  conduct  towards  the 
Puritans,  transcribes  a  state  paper  "  of  considerable  consequence," 
as  he  says,  laying  down  "  a  plan  of  a  Reformation"  and  contain- 
ing a  survey  of  the  "dangers  that  were  likely  to  follow."  The 
following  are  the  dangers  specified  in  that  survey  : 

"  1st.  The  Bishop  of  Rome  will  be  incensed  ;  will  excommu- 
nicate the  queen's  highness;  interdict  the  realm,  and  give  it  a 
prey  to  all  princes  that  will  enter  upon  it. 

"  2d.  The  French  king  and  his  people  will  be  encouraged  to 
persist  more  vigorously  in  the  war  against  declared  heretics. 

"  3d.  Scotland  will  have  some  boldness,  and  by  that  way  the 
French  king  will  soonest  attempt  to  invade  us. 

.^"  4th.    Ireland  will  be  very  difficult  to  be  stayed  in  their  obe- 
dience by  reason  of  the  clergy  that  are  associated  to  Rome. 


78  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

"  5th.  Many  people  of  our  own  will  be  very  much  discontented, 
especially  these  sorts  ;  (1)  Such  as  governed  in  the  late  Queen 
Mary's  reign,  and  were  chosen  thereto  for  no  other  cause,  or 
were  then  esteemed  for  being  hot  and  earnest  in  the  other  re- 
ligion;  and  now  remain  unplaced  or  uncalled  to  credit; — these 
will  study  all  the  ways  they  can  to  maintain  the  former  doings. 
(2)  The  Bishops  and  all  the  clergy  will  see  their  own  ruin ;  and 
in  confession  and  preaching,  and  all  other  ways  they  can,  will 
persuade  people  from  it.  (3)  Men  which  be  of  the  papist  sort, 
who  late  were  in  manner  all  the  judges  of  the  law,  and  justices 
of  the  peace, — are  like  to  join  with  the  bishops  and  clergy.  (4) 
1  Many  such  as  would  gladly  have  the  aiteratiows  from  the  Church 
of  Rome,  when  they  shall  see,  peradventure,  that  some  old  cere- 
monies shall  still  be  left,  or  that  their  doctrine  which  they  embrace 
is  not  allowed  and  commanded  only,  and  all  other  abolished  and 
disapproved,  shall  be  discontented  and  call  the  altered  religion 
a  cloaked  papistry,  a  mingle-mangle.'  " 

These  were  the  prudential  reasons  avowed,  for  not  being 
governed  solely  by  the  truth  and  purity  of  the  Word'  of  God  in 
the  proposed  Reformation,  but  by  considerations  of  Slate  policy. 
What  sort  of  standards  for  doctrine  and  rituals  such  a  heart- 
less politician  as  Queen  Elizabeth  was  likely  to  establish  under 
such  circumstances,  may  be  readily  conjectured. 

There  was  still  another  plea  for  conducting  the  Reformation 
rather  with  a  regard  to  keeping  the  Papists  quiet,  than  with  re- 
gard to  truth  and  purity  of  worship  ;  which  plea  is  thus  stated  by 
Maddox,  and  which,  though  I  have  already  quoted  it, is  of  suffi- 
cient importance  here  to  repeat :  "  Besides,  as  the  nation  in 
general  was  popish,  it  plainly  appeared  an  act  of  great  compas- 
sion to  many  thousand  souls,  as  well  as  necessary  to  the  queen's 
safety,  and  the  success  of  the  Reformation,  to  contrive,  if  it  were 
possible,  such  a  form  of  worship,  without  idolatry,  which  might 

KEEP  THE  POPISH  PEOPLE  IN  THE  CllURCH." 

Thus  the  ground  of  defence  and  justification  relied  upon  by 
Bishop  Maddox  in  his  work  against  the  Puritans,  is  the  unblush- 
ing avowal  that  the  offices  of  the  Church  of  England  were  finally 
settled,  not  on  the  ground  which  Protestants  consider  purest  and 
most  scriptural,  but  upon  the  designed  and  avowed  policy  of 
"keeping  the  Papists  in  the  Church;"  by  retaining  just  as  much 
of  the  popish  cast,  and  spirit,  and  forms,  as  was  "  not  idolatry ;" 
having  due  "  regard  to  the  essentials  of  religion ;"  which  were 
still  to  be  judged  of  by  the  politic  queen  ! 

Can  there  be  any  wonder  that  there  should  arise  a  BAND  OF 
PURITANS,  bold  enough  to  express  their  discontent  at  being  com- 
pelled not  only  to  conform  in  all  particulars  to  rituals  and  Lit^r- 
gies  established  on  these  principles  ;  but  compelled  also  to  sub- 


QUEEN    ELIZABETH.  79 

scribe  to  the  same,  their  unqualified  approval  as  fully  consonant  ^ 
to  the  Word  of  God  ?     Was  all  due  to   policy,  and  nothing  to 
conscience,  to  the  truth,  to  freedom,  and  to  God  ? 

If  the  dangers  which  surrounded  Queen  Elizabeth  might  be 
pleaded  to  justify  this  policy  in  the  beginning  of  her  reign,  these 
dangers  had  passed  away  before  her  greatest  severities  against 
the  Puritans  commenced ;  and  while  these  dangers  lasted,  the  /, 
Puritans  chose  rather  to  suffer  in  quiet,  waiving  their  rights 
and  enduring  everything  that  could  be  endured,  rather  than  fail 
in  patriotism ;  or  than  to  expose  the  Reformation  to  the  en- 
croachment of  foreign  powers.  That  the  Puritans  ever  sided 
with  the  Papist  against  the  Protestant  religion,  or  against  the 
Protestant  government  of  their  country,  no  well-informed  man 
will  ever  venture  to  assert,  till  in  his  party  zeal  he  has  bid  a  long 
adieu  to  truth.  When  the  Puritans  stood  at  last  for  their  rights, 
it  was  no  mere  resistance  to  a  crooked  state  policy  induced  by 
dangers  or  by  a  stern  necessity ;  but  a  resistance  to  tyranny  avoived 
on  principle,  and  to  the  settled  policy  of  despotism,  founded  on  no 
plea  of  danger,  but  on  open  denial  of  the  rights  of  conscience. 

Besides  this  policy,  which  led  to  the  predetermined  adherence 
to  many  of  the  forms  and  superstitions  of  Popery,  Elizabeth  was 
by  taste  and  principle  much  inclined  to  those  superstitions  and 
forms.  HUME  has  justly  said,  that  "  Elizabeth  was  attached  to 
the  Protestants  chiefly  by  her  interests  and  the  circumstances  of 
her  birth ;  and  seems  to  have  entertained  some  propensity  to  the 
Catholic  superstition,  at  least  to  the  ancient  ceremonies."  "  So 
far  was  the  princess  herself  from  being  willing  to  despoil  religion 
of  the  few  ornaments  and  ceremonies  which  remained  in  it," 
that  she  "  was  rather  inclined  to  bring'  the  public  worship  still 
nearer  the  Romish  ritual;  and  she  thought  the  Reformation 
had  already  gone  too  far  in  shaking  off  those  forms  and  ob- 
servances, which,  without  distracting  men  of  more  refined  appre- 
hensions, tend,  in  a  very  innocent  manner,  to  amuse  and  engage 
the  vulgar."  "  It  was  with  great  difficulty  (says  Neale,  on  the 
authority  of  Burnet),  and  not  without  a  sort  of  protestation  from 
the  bishops,  that  she  would  consent  to  have  orders  given  for 
taking  away  from  the  churches,  such  remnants  of  idolatry  as 
the  shrines,  rolls  of  wax,  paintings,  and  other  monuments  of 
feigned  miracles.  In  her  own  chapel  she  kept  still  a  crucifix 
with  images  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  St.  John ;  and  when 
Sandys,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  spoke  to  her  against  it,  she 
threatened  to  deprive  him  of  his  bishopric.  She  would  not 
part  with  her  altar  and  lighted  candles."  "  The  gentlemen  and 
singing  children  appeared"  [in  her  chapel]  "  in  their  surplices, 
and  priests  in  their  copes." — "  In  short,  the  service  performed  in 
the  queen's  chapel,  and  in  sundry  cathedrals,  was  so  splendid 


80  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

and  showy,  that  foreigners  could  not  distinguish  it  from  the 
Roman,  except  that  it  was  performed  in  the  English  tongue." 
"  By  this  means,  the  popish  laity  were  deceived  into  conformity, 
and  came  regularly  to  church  for  more  than  ten  years,  till  the 
Pope,  being  out  of  all  hopes  of  an  accommodation,  forbad  them, 
by  excommunicating  the  queen,  and  laying  the  whole  kingdom 
under  an  interdict."  "  She  grew  so  superstitious,"  says  Prince, 
"  that  when  she  was  sixty  years  old,  and  her  decaying  nature 
required  the  use  of  meat,  she  would  not  eat  a  bit  of  flesh  for  the 
forty  days  of  Lent,  without  a  solemn  license  from  her  own  arch- 
bishop Whitgift  (who  depended  wholly  on  her  for  power  to 
grant  it), — nor  would  she  be  easy  with  one  general  license,  but 
must  have  it  renewed  every  year,  for  several  years." 

When  we  add  to  these  considerations  of  state  policy,  and  to 
this  tendency  of  the  queen  to  superstition,  the  fact  that  to  seven 
Protestants  in  her  council  she  chose  thirteen  Papists, — and  that 
the  council  and  queen  controlled  entirely  the  establishment  of 
religion,  we  shall  be  able  to  anticipate  the  sort  of  Reformation 
which  was  likely  to  follow. 

Such  were  the  power,  the  policy,  the  taste,  the  principles, 
under  which  the  rituals  of  the  English  Church  were  to  receive 
that  final  establishment,  set  forth  in  the  Prayer-Book  which  it  is 
now  the  fashion  to  laud  as  the  "  sole  surviving  monument  of  the 
Reformation?'1*  A  strict  conformity  to  that  standard  was  now 
about  to  be  enforced  by  the  strong  hand  of  power,  and  every 
variation  to  be  sought  out  and  punished  with  inquisitoral 
seventy. 

The  thoroughly  Protestant  part  of  the  nation  was  not  in  a 
mood  to  have  anything  forced  upon  them,  which,  in  their  estima- 
tion, savored  of  the  mummeries  or  the  abominations  of  Popery. 
From  the  dungeons ;  from  the  flames  that  consumed  the  martyrs 
in  the  reign  of  terror  now  just  over,  they  had  imbibed  an  abso- 
lute horror  of  everything  popish.  In  the  gilded  ornaments, 
pompous  ceremonies,  and  ghostly  robes  of  the  man  of  sin,  they 
had  learned  to  discover  the  germs  of  false  principles,— the  latent 
seeds  of  a  superstition,  which,  when  matured  into  their  full 
growth  and  power,  and  fully  ripe,  had  turned  religion  itself  into 
an  engine  of  tyranny  and  murder.  They  had  learned  to  hate 
even  the  garment  spotted  by  the  flesh.  They  could  not  in  con- 
science give  the  sanction  of  their  example  to  the  use  of  ceremo- 
nies and  utensils  inseparably  joined,  in  the  common  estimation, 
to  the  superstitions  and  abominations  of  Popery.  In  retaining 
the  vestments,  utensils,  and  ceremonials  so  thoroughly  associ- 
ated with  Popery,  they  foretold  that  the  seeds  of  false  doctrine, 
of  superstition,  and  of  Popery  itself,  would  be  retained.  These 

*  Bishop  Brownell,  Charge. 


QUEEN    ELIZABETH.  81 

robes,  utensils,  and  rituals  were,  therefore,  in  their  view,  not  in- 
different. It  was  not  that  they  were  self-willed  ;  nor  were  they 
with  narrow  views  and  bigoted  minds  fighting  against  a  mere 
surplice  or  ceremony  ; — but  they  had  been  taught  by  bitter  ex- 
perience, to  resist  first  principles; — to  take  their  stand  where 
alone  a  stand  is  possible, — at  the  beginnings  of  the  evil,  before 
everything  is  overwhelmed  and  swept  away  by  its  prevailing 
flood. 

The  queen  pursued  the  line  of  policy  which  herself  with  the 
council  had  deliberately  marked  out.  For  some  time  the  public 
religion  continued  as  she  found  it.  The  popish  priests  kept  on 
celebrating  mass.  None  of  the  Protestant  clergy  ejected  in  the 
last  reign  were  restored.  Orders  were  given  against  all  innova- 
tions. When  some  began  to  use  King  Edward's  service  book, 
the  queen  prohibited  all  preaching,  and  the  reading  of  any  prayers 
save  those  appointed  by  law,  till  the  meeting  of  parliament. 
The  parliament  restored  to  the  sovereign  the  supremacy  of  the 
Church ;  gave  to  her  the  nomination  of  all  bishops  ;  and  vested 
in  the  crown,  the  power,  without  any  concurrence  of  Parlia- 
ment or  convocation,  to  repress  all  heresies,  to  establish  or  to 
repeal  all  canons  ;  to  ordain,  alter,  or  abolish,  whatever  religious 
rite  or  ceremony,  she  in  her  sovereign  discretion  and  pleasure 
should  choose.  In  order  to  the  due  exercise  of  this  power,  they 
gave  her  authority  to  institute  that  arbitrary  and  uncontrollable 
Court  of  High  Commission,  whose  atrocities  we  shall  hereafter 
have  so  much  occasion  to  notice. 

The  queen  now  instructed  her  committee  of  divines  to  revise 
King  Edward's  Liturgy.  They  were  required  to  strike  out  all 
offensive  passages  against  the  Pope,  and  to  make  the  people 
easy  about  the  bodily  presence  of  Christ  in  the  sacrament.  As 
to  the  wishes  of  those  who  desired  a  purer  worship,  no  provi- 
sion was  made,  or  intended  to  be  made,  out  of  regard  to  these. 
The  petition,  "  From  the  tyranny  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and 
all  his  detestable  enormities,  good  Lord  deliver  us"  was  struck 
out  from  the  Litany.  The  Rubric  declaring  that  by  kneeling  at 
the  sacrament  no  adoration  was  intended  to  any  corporeal  pre- 
sence of  Christ,  was  struck  out.  The  old  festivals,  with  their  eves, 
were  continued  as  in  the  second  year  of  King  Edward  VI.,  sub- 
ject to  the  queen's  pleasure  to  take  them  away.  Whereas  in  the 
revised  Liturgy  of  King  Edward,  all  the  garments  except  the 
surplice  were  laid  aside,  the  queen  now  ordered  that  the  copes 
and  other  gear  should  be  restored. 

The  Book  of  Common  Prayer  thus  prepared  was  by  parlia- 
ment established  by  law ;  and  to  its  rituals  and  worship  all  were 
required,  under  penalties  adequate  to  compel  anything  but  con- 
science, to  conform. 
6 


o5i  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

I  have  already  noticed  how,  all  along,  the  government  (not 
the  Church)  established  or  changed  the  organization  and  wor- 
ship of  the  Church  of  England.  It  was  not  the  Church,  but 
King  Henry  VIII.  or  Edward  VI.  and  council,  or  Queen  Eliza- 
beth and  council  and  parliament,  that  ordered  all  these  things. 
In  the  ratifying  of  this  service  book  in  parliament,  the  Archbishop 
of  York  objected  that  "  An  act  of  this  consequence  ought  to  have 
had  the  consent  of  the  clergy  in  Convocation,  before  it  passed 
into  law.  Even  Arian  Emperors,"  said  he,  "  ordered  that  points 
of  faith  should  be  examined  by  councils."  But  he  was  over- 
ruled. 

It  is  now  common  to  speak  of  the  establishment  of  that  Prayer- 
Book  as  the  work  of  the  Church  :  "  The  Church  has  ordered," 
"the  Church  bos  judged,"  "the  Church  has  decided !"  If  these 
things  had  been  said  of  Romish  mass  books  and  Romish  mum- 
meries, there  might  be  some  color  of  reason  for  pleading  the 
authority  of  the  Church.  But  in  establishing  the  English  Prayer- 
Book,  the  queen  and  parliament  were  the  authority.  The  Church 
— in  the  capacity  either  of  people,  clergy,  or  Convocation — 
had  no  other  hand  in  it,  than  submissively  to  receive  whatever 
their  masters  should  impose. 

"  The  forms  and  ceremonies  now  preserved  in  the  English 
Church,"  says  Hume,  "  as  they  bore  some  resemblance  to  the 
ancient  service,  tended  further  to  reconcile  the  Catholics  to  the 
established  religion  :  and  as  the  queen  permitted  no  other  mode 
of  worship,  and  at  the  same  time  struck  out  everything  offensive 
to  them  in  the  new  Liturgy,  even  those  who  were  addicted  to 
the  Romish  communion  made  no  scruple  of  attending  the  estab- 
lished Church."  The  plan  of  keeping  the  Papists  in  the  Church 
was  eminently  successful.  Maddox  himself  notices  that  even  as 
late  as  A.  D.  1561,  upon  a  visitation  of  Archbishop  Parker,  the 
major  part  of  the  beneficed  clergy  were  either  mechanics,  or  mass 
priests  in  disguise.  And  to  justify  the  imposition  of  uniform 
rites  of  worship  and  forms  of  prayer  he  adds,  that  "  Most  of  the 
inferior  beneficed  clergy  kept  their  places,"  and  that  there  were 
only  100  parochial  clergy  displaced  out  of  9400  parochial  bene- 
fices. The  rest  of  the  priesthood  were  such  men  as  had  con- 
formed to  the  religion  of  the  bloody  Mary ;  and  were,  therefore, 
either  Papists  or  hypocrites.  If  any  of  the  exiled  clergy  would 
conform  to  the  queen's  establishment,  they  were  furnished  with 
places  ;  if  not,  such  as  had  at  first  been  suffered  to  officiate  were 
suspended  ;  and,  as  the  least  part  of  their  sufferings,  reduced  to 
poverty.  It  was  not  for  want  of  evangelical  and  learned  men, 
that  illiterate  mechanics  were  put  into  beneficed  parishes, 
but  because  these  men  could  not  in  conscience  comply  with  the 
queen's  demands.  Jewell  (afterwards  Archbishop),  the  year 


QUEEN    ELIZABETH.  8t> 

after  the  queen's  accession,  wrote  lamenting  the  "  worldly  poli- 
cy "  with  which  the  Reformation  was  conducted :  "  As  if  the 
Word  of  God  was  not  to  be  received  on  his  own  authority"  He 
complained  of  the  imposition  of  the  popish  vestments,  "  the  relics 
of  the  Amorites,"  and  wishes  they  were  "  exterminated  to  the 
deepest  roots."  Grindal  (afterwards  Archbishop)  joined  in 
these  complaints ;  as  also  did  Cox,  Horn  and  Pilkington,  after- 
wards bishops.  Many  others  did  the  same,  whose  judgment 
and  heart  were  for  a  purer  worship,  but  who  vacillated  between 
the  duty  of  steadfastness  for  truth  and  purity,  arid  the  policy  of 
yielding  for  the  present,  with  the  hope  of  redress  hereafter.  Knox, 
Sampson,  Gilpin,  and  the  old  translator  of  the  Bible,  Miles 
Coverdale,  were  offered  bishoprics ;  but  they  could  not  in  con- 
science conform  to  the  prescribed  rituals.  Whitehead  was  offered 
the  Archbishopric  of  Canterbury,  but  for  the  same  reasons  he 
declined.  These  took  their  stand  among'  the  PURITANS.  Grindal, 
Jewell,  Cox,  Horn,  and  Pilkington,  yielded  and  received  bishop- 
rics, yet  "  with  fear  and  trembling,"  in  hopes  by  their  interest 
with  the  queen  to  obtain  some  reform  in  the  constitution  of  the 
Church. 

This  was  the  very  thing  against  which  the  Reformers  on  the 
continent  had,  from  their  own  bitter  experience,  warned  the 
exiles  upon  their  return  to  England.  Bullinger  and  Peter  Mar- 
tyr, had  written  earnestly  to  Jewell,  Horn,  Grindal,  and  the  rest 
of  the  exiles,  to  "  take  care  in  the  first  beginnings,  to  have  all 
things  settled  upon  sure  and  sound  foundations."  Gualter,  of 
Zurich,  in  a  prophetic  strain,  and  yet  only  deriving  his  forecast 
from  the  lessons  of  experience,  urged  the  Reformers,  "  Not  to 
hearken  to  thd  councils  of  those  men,  who  when  they  saw  that 
Popery  could  not  be  honestly  defended,  nor  entirely  restrained, 
would  use  all  artifices  to  have  the  outward  face  of  religion  to  re- 
main mixed,  uncertain,  and  doubtful ;  so  that  while  an  evangelical 
religion  is  pretended,  those  things  should  be  obtruded  on  the 
Church  which  will  make  the  returning  back  to  Popery,  supersti- 
tion, and  idolatry,  easy."  "  We  have  had  experience  of  this," 
said  he,  "  for  some  years  in  Germany,  and  know  what  influence 
such  persons  may  have."  "  I  apprehend  that  in  the  first  begin- 
nings, while  men  may  study  to  avoid  the  giving  of  small 
offence,  many  things  may  be  suffered  under  this  color  for  a 
little  while,  and  yet  it  will  scarce  be  possible,  by  all  the  endeavors 
that  can  be  used,  to  get  them  removed,  at  least  without  great  strug- 
gles" 

It  was  thus  that  the  far  reaching  view  of  the  Puritans  foresaw 
the  result  of  retaining  in  the  Church  of  England  things  which 
were  in  their  origin  popishj  and  in  their  nature  almost  insepara- 
bly united  with  the  fundamental  errors  and  superstitions  of  Po- 


04  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

pery.  Jewell  and  Grindal  hoped  for  a  further  reform.  The  Pu- 
ritans entertained  no  such  hope.  They  reasoned — they  stood, 
as  though  they  foresaw, — and  they  actually  did  foretell,  the  in- 
sinuating spirit  with  which  these  objectionable  things  would  not 
only  be  retained,  but  how,  like  a  gangrene,  they  would  eat  out 
the  very  vitals  of  evangelical  religion.  I  shall  ask  you  to  ob- 
serve, as  we  progress,  the  remarkable  fulfilment  of  these  predic- 
tions. The  declension  from  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformers  to 
that  compound  of  Arminianism  and  Popery  which  prevailed 
under  the  persecuting  Laud,  was  but  a  part  of  their  fulfilment. 
Elizabeth  was  not  in  her  grave,  before  no  dubious  traces  of  that 
same  compound,  now  known  under  the  name  of  Puseyisrn,  began 
largely  to  develope  themselves  in  the  Church  of  England.  The 
same  corruption  swept  over  the  Church  in  the  days  of  High 
Churchism  under  Queen  Anne.  Again,  before  the  rise  of  Wes- 
ley and  Whitefield,  says  the  "  London  Christian  Observer"  " The 
majority  of  the  clergy  denounced  the  doctrine  of  Justification  by 
Faith,  as  hostile  to  the  interests  of  morality"  "  In  this  shape," 
says  the  same  authority,  "  the  dispute  came  down  to  the  present 
century.  Our  clergy  had  nearly  lost  sight  of  the  true  Protestant 
Scripture  doctrine."  "  The  clergy  very  generally  disclaimed  alto- 
gether the  doctrine  of  Justification  by  Faith,  and  exhorted  men  to 
justify  themselves  by  good  living.  They,  in  fact,  adopted  the  Pa- 
pists'1 second  justification,  losing  sight  of  the  first"  The  immor- 
tal Wilberforce  declared  the  prevalent  errors  of  the  clergy  and 
Church  in  his  day  to  be  such,  that  "The  very  genius  and  essential 
nature  of  Christianity  was  changed;"  and  that  the  great  essential 
doctrines  of  Christianity,  "  had  almost  altogether  vanished  from 
view.  Even  in  the  greatest  number  of  our  sermons,  scarcely  any 
traces  of  them  are  to  be  found." 

The  labors  of  Wesley  and  Whilefield ;  the  publication  of  Wil- 
berforce's  "  Practical  View  of  the  prevailing  religious  system  of 
professed  Christians,  contrasted  with  real  Christianity;"  the 
writings  of  Hannah  More — to  say  nothing  of  those  of  such  men 
as  John  Newton  and  Thomas  Scott — constituted  a  new  era. 
Religion  had  been  greatly  revived  in  the  Church  of  England. 
But  while  the  world  is  beginning  to  hope  for  better  things,  lo! 
Oxfordism — otherwise  called  Puseyism — breaks  forth  once  more 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Church  ;  and  is  carrying  it  once  more,  with 
fearful  strides,  back  to  the  popish  corruptions  from  which  it, 
seemed  to  have  escaped.  The  rising  leprosy  crosses  the  Atlan- 
tic; and  the  friends  of  true  religion  lift  up  their  voices  against  it 
in  vain.  The  Bishop  of  New  York  in  his  charge  (of  1841)  ex- 
tols the  scheme,  and  says,  "  My  brethren,  draw  your  studies  this 
way."  The  Bishops  of  Maryland  and  New  Jersey  come  out  its 
open,  strenuous,  and  unflinching  advocates.  The  Bishop  of  Con- 


QUEEN    ELIZABETH.  85 

necticut,  in  his  solemn  charge,  adopts  most  of  the  fundamentals 
of  that  scheme  ;  and  from  all  his  clergy,  and  from  the  whole 
Church  over  which  he  presides,  he  is  not  met  by  one  single  note 
of  remonstrance  or  alarm!  Is  it  prejudice  or  want  of  charity 
which  leads  people  of  other  communions  to  stigmatize  that 
Puseyistic  scheme  as  Popery  ?  Hear  then  the  Bishop  of  Calcut- 
ta :  "  It  is,"  says  he,  "  to  me  a  matter  of  surprise  and  shame,  that 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  we  should  really  have  the  fundamental 
position  of  the  whole  system  of  Popery  virtually  re-asserted  in 
the  bosom  of  that  very  Church  which  was  reformed  so  deter- 
minately,  three  centuries  since,  from  this  self-same  evil,  by  the 
doctrine  and  labors  and  martyrdom  of  Cranmer  and  his  noble 
fellow  sufferers."  "  What !  are  we  to  have  all  the  fond  tenets 
which  formerly  sprang  from  the  traditions  of  men  re-introduced  ?" 
— "  Are  we  to  have  a  refined  transubstantiation ;  the  sacraments, 
not  faith,  the  chief  means  of  salvation  ?"  "  The  whole  hangs 
together :  IT  CONSTITUTES  ANOTHER  GOSPEL.  It  overturns  the 
grand  peculiarity  and  centre  tenet  of  all  the  reformed  Churches." 
— "  Rome,  not  the  reformed  Churches,  are  the  object  of  venera- 
tion."— "Episcopacy  is  accounted,  in  the  teeth  of  our  Articles,  to 
be  absolutely,  and  under  all  circumstances,  essential  to  the  exist- 
ence of  a  Church."  *  *  *  "  I  am  full  of  alarm  ;  everything  is 
at  stake.  There  seems  something  judicial  in  the  spread  of  these 
opinions.  If  they  should  come  over  here,  and  pervade  the  teach- 
ing of  our  chaplains,  the  views  and  proceedings  of  our  mission- 
aries, our  friendly  relations  with  other  bodies  of  Christians,  our 
position  among  the  Hindoos  and  Mahometans, — ICHABOD, — the 
glory  is  departed;  may  be  inscribed  over  our  Church  of  India. 
All  real  advances  in  the  conversion  of  the  heathen  will  stop" 

While  many  of  the  best  men  in  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this 
country  speak  out  boldly  and  decidedly,  like  the  Bishop  of  Cal- 
cutta, the  general  policy  is  to  hush  this  matter  up ;  to  persuade 
the  people  not  to  read,  not  to  talk  on  this  subject;  and  in  the 
meantime  the  doctrine  spreads.  With  the  old  Puritans,  I  ven- 
ture to  predict  that  IT  WILL  BE  HUSHED  UP  ;  it  will  not  be,  it 
cannot  be,  effectually  resisted  under  the  organization  and  disci- 
pline and  liturgy  of  that  Church.  The  gangrene  will  spread  on; 
appearing  less  and  less  horrible  to  the  members  of  that  commu- 
nion, as  it  becomes  more  and  more  familiar ; — or  I  have  misjudged 
the  inherent  character  of  the  High  Church  Episcopal  claims  ; 
and  drawn*  from  history  my  anticipations  of  the  future  in 
vain.* 

But  what  were  the  particular  complaints  of  the  Puritans  ?     It 

*  This  was  written  in  1S43.  The  world  has  seen  how  amply  the  doings  of  the 
General  Convention  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in  1845,  have  fulfilled  this 
prediction. 


OO  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

is  sufficient  to  mention  a  few  of  their  leading  objections}  to 
show  the  ground  and  nature  of  the  whole.  I  have  already 
noticed  their  objections  against  being  compelled  to  wear  the 
garments  which  were  so  inseparably  associated  with  Romish  doc- 
trines and  superstitions  with  regard  to  the  sacerdotal  character  and 
offices  of  the  Priesthood.  These  objections  need  not  here  be 
repeated. 

They  objected  against  being  required  to  make  the  sign  of  the 
cross  in  baptism;  not  only  as  unscriptural,  but  as  associated,  in 
the  minds  of  the  people,  with  the  idea  of  some  mystical  virtue 
arising  from  the  performance  of  a  ceremony,  through  the  ghostly 
character  and  power  of  the  Priest. 

They  objected  against  the  private  baptism  of  infants  by  women 
in  cases  of  emergency,  as  countenancing  the  idea  of  mystical 
virtue  attached  to  the  performance  of  the  rite  ;  and  as  connected 
with  the  notion  that  infants  dying  without  baptism  cannot  be 
saved. 

They  objected  against  the  requirement  of  Godfathers  and 
Godmothers ;  as  unscriptural ;  as  taking  the  responsibility  out 
of  the  hands  of  parents  where  God  had  placed  it ;  and  as  a 
virtual  denial  of  the  covenant  on  which  infant  baptism  is  found- 
ed ; — resting  the  baptism  not  on  the  parents'1  faith  and  privilege, 
and  God's  covenant  promise, — but  on  the  figment  of  a  faith  and 
repentance  PROMISED  by  the  child,  through  his  irresponsible  spon- 
sors. This  was  to  renounce  God's  covenant  and  promise,  and 
to  base  the  transaction  on  an  unscriptural  figment  and  ceremony, 
wholly  the  invention  of  man  ;  and  that  too  a  corrupt  and  profane 
invention. 

They  objected  against  the  ceremony  of  confirmation :  (1)  as 
unscriptural,  (2)  as  a  false  pretence  of  communicating  grace,  (3) 
as  certifying  people  of  the  favor  of  God,  when  the  conditions 
of  confirmation  do  not  forbid  that  the  ceremony  may  be, — nay,  in 
an  indiscriminate  national  Church,  often  must  be, — a  confirm- 
ing of  the  enemies  of  God  in  a  miserable  and  ruinous  delusion. 

They  objected  against  the.  injunction  requiring  all  to  kneel  at 
the  Lord's  Supper;  (1)  as  being  no  imitation  of  Christ  or  his 
Apostles,  who  received  the  first  Supper  at  a  table  in  the  ordinary 
table  posture  ; — (2)  as  not  being  used  even  by  the  Primitive 
Church  in  the  ages  succeeding  the  Apostles,  but  as  being  ex- 
pressly condemned  ;  and  (3)  as  not  having  been  required  till 
the  bread  in  the  Sacrament  was  pretended  to  be  tramubstantiated 
into  the  real  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ ;  when  people 
were  enjoined  to  kneel — as  an  act  of  worship  paid  to  the  real 
presence  and  PERSON  OF  CHRIST  HIMSELF  under  the  FORM  OF 
BREAD.  And  though  in  King  Edward's  time  a  rubric  had  been 
added,  declaring  that  the  kneeling  was  not  now  required  as  an 


QUEEN    ELIZABETH.  87 

act  of  worship,  as  if  to  the  body  of  Christ ;  yet  now  by  Queen 
Elizabeth's  command  that  explanation  was  stricken  out,  for  the 
very  purpose  that  the  Papists  might  still, — in  the  use  of  the 
Liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England, — continue  the  idolatry  of 
worshipping  a  breaden  God.  The  Puritans  objected  to  no 
decent  posture,  merely  as  a  posture ;  but  they  were  unwilling 
to  give  this  implied  sanction  to  the  doctrine  of  transubstantia- 
tion,  or  to  open  idolatry. 

They  objected  against  the  injunction  of  the  Liturgy,  that 
"  When  in  time  of  divine  service  the  name  of  Jesus  shall  be 
mentioned,  due  and  lowly  reverence  shall  be  done  by  all  persons 
present."  This  the  Puritans  regarded  as  a  childish  and  super- 
stitious interpretation  of  the  passage,  "  At  the  name  of  Jesus 
every  knee  shall  bow ;"  as  though  a  bodily  bowing,  at  the  literal 
name,  were  even  a  resemblance  of  the  thing  intended  in 
Scripture;  and  as  though  it  were  proper  to  make  this  distinction 
between  the  mere  literal  name  of  Jesus,  and  the  other  names  of 
the  Godhead. 

They  objected  to  the  ring  in  marriage  ;  as  one  of  the  charmed 
symbols  of  the  POPISH  SACRAMENT  of  marriage.  The  custom 
had  been  to  bless  the  ring ;  or  to  speak  more  truly,  to  CHARM  it 
with  a  popish  incantation.  The  popish  office  for  consecrating 
the  ring  ran  thus  [I  copy  from  "  Challoner's  Catholic  Christian 
instructed ;"  a  work  published  by  authority] :  The  priest  says, 
"  Let  us  pray."  Then  he  says,  "  Bless  +  O  Lord"  (here  he 
makes  the  sign  of  the  Cross),  "  this  ring,  which  we  bless  -f-  in 
thy  name ;  that  she  that  shall  wear  it,  keeping  inviolate  fidelity 
to  her  spouse,  may  ever  remain  in  peace,  and  in  thy  will ;  and 
always  remain  in  mutual  charity  through  Christ  our  Lord.  Amen." 
"  Then  the  priest  sprinkles  the  ring-  with  holy  water,  and  the 
bridegroom  taking  it,  puts  the  ring  on  the  fourth  finger  of  the  left 
hand,  saying,  In  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost ;  with  this  ring  I  thee  wed,"  &c. 

They  objected  against  filling  up  the  calendar  with  a  multitude 
of  Saints'*  Days  which  people  were  required  to  observe  religiously, 
while  the  Lords  Day  was  required  to  be  made  a  day  of  merri- 
ment and  sports. 

They  objected  to  the  office  of  Baptism*  in  which  the  priest  is 
required  to  say,  "  We  yield  thee  humble  thanks  *  *  that  it  hath 
pleased  thee  to  regenerate  this  infant  with  thy  Holy  Spirit?' 

They  objected  to  the  service  for  visitation  of  the  sick,  in  which 
the  priest  is  required,  upon  the  patient's  profession  of  penitence, 
to  pronounce  this  ABSOLUTION  ;  "  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
hath  left  power  to  his  Church  to  absolve  all  sinners  who  truly 
repent  and  believe  in  him ;  of  his  great  mercy  forgive  thee  thine 

*  Bogue  and  Bennett— History  of  the  Dissenters. 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

offences ;  and  BY  HIS  AUTHORITY  committed  to  me,  I  ABSOLVE 
THEE  FROM  ALL  THY  SINS,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  Amen."  The  Puritans  considered 
this  not  only  the  means  of  a  cruel  delusion,  but  a  blasphemous 
assumption  of  power  which  belongs  to  God  only.* 

They  objected  against  the  Burial  Service,  that  the  clergyman 
was  required  to  say  over  every  one,  save  unbaptized  adults,  and 
those  who  die  excommunicated,  or  who  have  laid  violent  hands 
on  themselves,  these  words :  "  For  as  much  as  it  hath  pleased 
Almighty  God,  of  his  great  mercy  to  take  unto  himself  the  soul 
of  our  dear  brother  now  departed,  we  therefore  commit  his  body 
to  the  ground  *  *  in  sure  hope  of  the  resurrection  to  eternal 
life;"  and  again,  "  We  give  thee  hearty  thanks  that  it  hath 
pleased  thee  to  deliver  this  our  brother  out  of  the  miseries  of  this 
sinful  world,  beseeching  that  it  may  please  thee  shortly  to  accom- 
plish the  number  of  thine  elect." 

Against  such  things,  among  others,  in  the  service  book,  1  he  Pu- 
ritans objected  as  popish,  and  as  tending  to  bring  back  a  scheme 
of  faith  not  only  corrupt,  but  subversive  of  the  true  gospel ;  and 
calculated  to  delude  and  destroy  the  souls  of  men.  Those  who 
revised  the  Liturgy  for  the  Episcopal  Church  in  America  ap- 
pear to  have  considered  that  there  were  good  grounds  for 
objection  in  some  of  these  instances  ;  for  the  absolution  in  the 
visitation  of  the  sick  is  omitted ;  and  the  burial  service,  instead 
of  saying  that  God  hath  taken  the  soul  of  the  deceased  "  to  him- 
self*,"  says  simply,  that  He  hath  taken  it  "out  of  the  world;"  and 
instead  of  committing  the  body  to  the  earth  "  in  sure  and  certain 
hope  of  the  resurrection  to  eternal  life,"  the  American  book  reads, 
"  Looking  for  the  GENERAL  resurrection  in  the  last  day." 

Such  were  the  original  complaints  of  the  Puritans.  But  they 
were  put 'down  by  the  strong  hand  of  power.  Deprivations, 
fines,  maiming,  slitting  of  the  nostrils,  cropping  of  the  ears, 
lingering  death  by  famine,  and  cold,  and  sickness,  in  damp,  un- 
wholesome prisons  ;  these  were  the  arguments  used  to  enforce 
a  uniform  observance  of  the  Liturgy  and  rituals  imposed  by  law. 

It  was  impossible  that  the  Puritans,  under  these  persecutions, 
should  not  at  length  enter  into  some  inquiry  concerning  the 
fundamental  principles  of  RIGHT  ;  and  concerning  the  AUTHORITY 

OF    THE    PERSECUTING    POWER. 

They  began  to  inquire  what  right  the  CIVIL  POWER  had  to 
make  laws  for  the  faith  and  order  of  the  Church  ;  and  at  once  it 
flashed  upon  their  minds,  that  the  assumption  of  such  authority 
is  not  only  unscriptural,  but  a  despotic  usurpation,  entirely 
destructive  both  of  purity  in  religion  and  of  all  religious  liberty, — 
the  dearest  and  most  important  of  all  human  rights.  It  fol- 
*  Bogue  and  Bennett — History  of  the  Dissenters. 


QUEEN*  ELIZABETH.  89 

lowed,  that  whether  the  particular  things  complained  of  in  the 
Liturgy  were  right  or  wrong  ;  the  imposition  of  a  Liturgy  or  of 
ceremonials  or  articles  of  faith,  by  parliament,  was  in  itself  a 
heinous  wrong— an  act  of  despotism  ;  and  that  all  the  laws  to 
enforce  that  imposition  were  so  many  acts  of  outrage  upon  the 
dearest  rights  of  man.  If  the  prince  and  parliament  may  impose 
articles  of  faith,  and  forms  and  ceremonies  of  worship,  then  that 
right  was  as  good  in  Queen  Mary,  as  in  King  Edward  or  in 
Queen  Elizabeth.  Then,  when  the  sovereigns  are  popish  the 
people  are  bound  in  duty  to  God  to  be  good  papists.  Then 
the  people  must  be  Lutherans  in  Saxony,  good  Greek  Christians 
at  Constantinople ;  and  in  old  England,  they  must  have  no  fixed 
faith  or  worship, — no,  nor  any  conscience  or  principle  in  the  mat- 
ter, save  meekly  to  change  their  religion  with  every  change  or 
caprice  of  the  sovereign. 

But  if  the  civil  authority  has  not  that  power,  does  it  reside 
in  the  HIERARCHY?  The  inquiry  was  first  with  regard  to  the 
rightful  power  of  the  bishops  ;  and  secondly,  with  regard  to  their 
rightful  existence.  In  the  first  case,  it  was  discovered  that  if 
Queen  Elizabeth's  bishops  have  authority  to  alter,  to  change,  and 
impose  Liturgies  and  forms,  then  the  same  power  resided  in 
Gardiner  and  the  Bloody  Bonner ;  and  the  consequences  were 
the  same  as  in  the  case  of  the  same  authority  in  the  sovereign. 
The  inquiry  on  the  second  point  resulted  in  the  conviction  that 
the  very  office  and  order  of  prelatical  bishops  was  unknown 
both  to  the  early  Church  and  to  the  Word  of  God.  Wickliffe 
had  indeed  taught  this  before.  And  John  Knox,  even  before  he 
became  acquainted  with  Calvin,  had  refused  the  offer  of  a  bish- 
opric from  King  Edward  VI.  on  this  ground.* 

For  this,  Beza,  who  has  of  late  been  represented  as  favorable 
to  the  English  Hierarchy,  bestows  on  Knox  the  highest 
eulogiums. 

But  if  the  Hierarchy  of  Prelates  has  not  that  power,  may 
such  impositions  be  made  by  the  Church  ?  The  Church"! 
These  impositions  are  not  made  by  the  Church,  in  any  capacity ; 
but  by  the  queen  and  parliament.  True,  they  are  as  much  the 
Church  as  the  bishops  are  ;  but  what  right  have  prelatic  bishops, 
whose  very  existence  is  questionable, — what  right  have  these  to 
make  such  impositions?  The  Church!  What  is  the  Church? 
How  does  she  make  known  her  decisions  ?  May  she  impose 
Popery  in  one  age  or  country,  and  Protestantism  in  another  ?  and 
are  we  still  bound  to  change  with  her,  however  she  may  chance 
to  change  ? 

Here  arose  another  great  issue :—  Wliat  is  the  Church  ?  Wliat 
is  its  organization?  What  is  the  reach  and  the  limit  of  its 

*  Bogue  and  Bennett— History  of  the  Dissenters. 


90 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


power  ?  The  inquiry  convinced  the  Puritans  that  such  a  thing 
as  either  a  Catholic  authoritative  unity,  or  a  national  or  diocesan 
Church^  with  power  to  impose  articles,  creeds,  liturgies  or  cere- 
monials upon  individual  congregations  of  Christians,  was  un- 
known to  the  New  Testament  and  to  the  early  ages  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  a  sheer  usurpation;  equally  destructive  of  purity  of 
faith  or  worship  ;  incompatible  with  religious  liberty,  and  at  war 
with  the  dearest  rights  of  man. 

In  addition  to  this,  their  inquiries  resulted  in  the  conclusion, 
that  a  Church  gathering  whole  parishes — the  profane — the  unbe- 
lieving— the  careless  and  the  impious— ^indifferently?  within  its 
pale,  was  not  only  inconsistent  with  the  ends,  the  character,  and 
discipline  of  a  Church  as  described  in  the  New  Testament ;  but 
necessarily  destructive  of  those  ends ;  and  calculated  to  delude 
and  deceive  men  to  their  eternal  ruin. 

These  were  the  results  to  which  they  were  gradually  led,  as 
longer  discussion  and  suffering  brought  them  more  and  more 
fully  into  the  light.  For  a  long  time  they  were  in  doubt  with 
regard  to  the  alleged  sinfulness  of  SCHISM  :  they  dared  not, — 
they  wished  not  to  separate.  For  a  long  time  they  continued  to 
forbear  and  to  suffer ;  till  at  length  they  were  forced  to  the  con- 
viction that  they  could  not  worship  God  according  to  his  require- 
ments, and  continue  with  a  corrupt  and  persecuting  Church.  At 
length  they  saw  that  for  congregations  of  Christians  to  use  the  free- 
dom with  which  Christ  has  endowed  them;  to  follow  Christ  where 
others  depart  from  him;  and.  to  worship  God  according  to  his 
Word)  is  NOT  AND  CANNOT  BE  scHisMATiCAL  i  and  that  if  there 
be  a  separation  or  a  schism,  the  sin  is  on  those  who  DEPART  FROM 

THE  TRUTH  AND  SIMPLICITY  OF  CHRIST,  UOt  On  tllOSe  who  FOLLOW 

IT  ;  and  on  those  who  OBSTRUCT  AND  PERSECUTE  THE  LIBERTY 

WHEREWITH     CHRIST    HAS    MADE    FREE  J    NOT  ON  THOSE  WHO    EN- 
JOY IT. 

The  causes  which  led  to  these  investigations  and  results,  and 
the  persecutions  which  awaited  those  who  dared  to  stand  for 
purity  and  freedom  to  worship  God,  will  be  further  set  forth  in 
the  following  chapter. 


VII. 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  PRINCIPLE. 

Ultimate  scope  of  Puritanic  Principles.  Means  employed  to  exterminate 
them.  Their  rapid  spread  :  nearly  prevail  in  Convocation.  The  Puri- 
tans ask  only  liberty  of  Conscience.  Not  a  struggle  for  political  power. 
Remonstrances  of  the  Puritans.  The  Separation  begins.  Persecutions. 
The  nation  roused. 

THE  contest, thus  basing  itself  upon  the  fundamental  principles 
of  purity  and  religious  liberty,  was  likely  to  enlist  not  enthusiasts 
alone,  whose  zeal  flames  out  hotly  for  a  season  and  then  expires, 
— but  the  sober,  the  deep  thinkings—whatever  men  had  penetra- 
tion enough  to  perceive  the  mighty  interests  involved,  and  prin- 
ciple sufficient  to  forego  every  personal  advantage,  and  to  set 
themselves  for  the  truth  and  for  freedom,  in  defiance  of  the  storm 
that  was  now  preparing  to  rage.  Such  men  there  were  ;  men 
deeply  learned  in  the  school  of  Christ,  and  in  all  human  wis- 
dom :  men  whose  talents  and  influence  the  court  would  have 
been  glad  to  purchase  by  placing  them  upon  the  bench  of  bish- 
ops, had  they  known  how  to  barter  truth  and  freedom  for  so 
tempting  a  prize.  They  had  already  learned  how  to  endure  ad- 
versity for  Christ.  They  had  witnessed  the  devastations  of 
Popery.  They  had  traced  its  abominations  to  their  source, — to 
the  very  beginnings  and  principles  of  the  impositions  to  which 
they  were  now  required  to  yield. 

It  was  a  new  thing  for  the  people  and  their  humble  pastors  to 
talk  about  RIGHTS.  But  this  new  idea, — fraught  with  such  con- 
sequences to  the  human  race,  and  destined  ultimately  to  revolu- 
tionize all  the  theories  of  government  that  the  world  had  enter- 
tained,— now  started  up  in  the  minds  of  the  Puritans.  Despot- 
ism and  superstition  were  now  to  encounter  a  new  enemy ;*— • 
the  consciousness  of  RIGHTS  founded  on  a  sense  of  RESPONSIBILITY 
TO  GOD.  The  soul  of  freedom  and  the  soul  of  religion  were 
now  to  combine  in  rousing  up  the  Puritans  to  a  firmness  and 
energy  which  no  terrors  could  appal,  and  which  no  force  of  op- 
pression and  no  violence  could  subdue.  Here  was  the  spring 


92  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

of  their  lofty  courage  and  of  their  patient  endurance.  Nothing 
was  more  certain  than  that  the  simplest  forms  of  religious  wor- 
ship, and  that  republicanism,  both  in  church  and  state,  must 
eventually  spring  from  these  principles  arid  this  spirit. 

The  queen  and  her  leading  statesmen  saw  the  ultimate  scope 
of  this  contest  of  principle,  and  determined  to  crush  the  rising 
doctrine  of  popular  rights.  The  "  Judicious  Hooker"  saw  that 
the  controversy  drew  deep  into  great  questions  of  doctrine 
and  of  right.  "  Let  not  any  one  imagine,"  said  he,  "  that  the 
bare  and  naked  difference  of  a  few  ceremonies  could  either  have 
kindled  so  much  fire,  or  caused  it  to  flame  so  long ;  but  that  the 
parties  which  herein  have  labored  mightily  for  change,  and  (as 
they  say)  for  reformation,  had  somewhat  more  than  this  mark 
whereat  to  aim."  It  was  so  indeed  :  the  commencement  of  a 
momentous  contest  which  will  hereafter  for  ever  mark  an  era  in 
the  history  of  the  struggle  between  despotism  and  the  rights  of 
man. 

The  queen  now  appointed  her  COURT  OF  HIGH  COMMISSION, 
and  directed  a  general  visitation,  to  remove  from  the  churches 
such  papal  furniture  as  it  had  been  determined  to  dispense  with, 
and  to  enforce  the  act  of  uniformity.  That  Court  of  High  Com- 
mission figures  largely  in  the  future  history  of  the  Puritans.  Its 
enormities  were  so  indescribably  oppressive  and  cruel,  that  at 
length  its  very  name  became  as  odious  as  that  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion ;  and  the  court  was  at  last  dissolved  by  act  of  parliament, 
with  a  clause  that  no  such  jurisdiction  should  be  received  for  the 
future  in  any  court  whatever.  As  we  shall  have  occasion  so 
often  to  refer  to  the  doings  of  that  court,  it  is  proper  here  to  give 
a  brief  general  account  of  its  constitution  and  powers.  Hume 
thus  describes  it : — "  The  queen  appointed  forty-four  Commis- 
sioners, twelve  of  whom  were  ecclesiastics ;  three  Commissioners 
made  a  quorum.  The  jurisdiction  of  the  court  extended  over 
the  whole  kingdom,  and  over  all  orders  of  men ;  and  every  cir- 
cumstance of  its  authority,  and  all  its  methods  of  proceedings, 
were  contrary  to  the  plainest  principles  of  law  and  natural 
equity."  "  The  Commissioners  were  empowered  to  visit  and 
reform  all  errors,  heresies,  schisms, — in  a  word,  to  regulate  all 
opinions,  as  well  as  to  punish  all  breaches  of  uniformity  in  the 
exercise  of  public  worship.  They  were  directed  to  make  in- 
quiry, not  only  by  the  legal  methods  of  juries  and  witnesses,  but 
by  all  other  means  and  ways  which  they  could  devise ;  that  is, 
by  the  racks,  by  torture,  by  inquisition,  \>y  punishment " — "  Where 
they  found  reason  to  suspect  any  person,  they  might  administer 
to  him  an  OATH  called  Ex  OFFICIO,  by  which  he  was  bound  to 
answer  all  questions,  and  might  thereby  be  compelled  to  accuse 
himself,  or  his  most  intimate  friend.  The  fines  which  they 


THE    CONFLICT    OF    PRINCIPLE.  93 

levied  .were  discretionary,  and  often  occasioned  the  total  ruin  of 
the  offender,  contrary  to  the  established  laws  of  the  kingdom. 
The  imprisonment  to  which  they  condemned  any  delinquents, 
was  limited  by  no  rule  but  their  own  pleasure.  They  assumed 
a  power  of  imposing  on  the  clergy  what  new  articles  of 
subscription,  and  consequently  of  faith,  they  thought  proper. 
Though  all  of  the  spiritual  courts  were  subject,  since  the  Refor- 
mation, to  inhibitions  from  the  supreme  courts  of  law,  the 
ecclesiastical  commissioners  were  exempted  from  their  control." — 
"  The  punishments  which  they  might  inflict,  were  according  to 
their  wisdom,  conscience,  and  discretion.  In  a  word,  this  court 
was  a  real  INQUISITION  ;  attended  with  all  the  iniquities  as  well  as 
cruelties  inseparable  from  that  tribunal."  Such  was  the  engine 
of  persecution  whose  powers  were  so  long  exerted  in  the  work 
of  exterminating  the  Puritans. 

The  visitors  of  the  High  Commission  now  set  about  the  work 
of  removing  from  the  churches  the  utensils  and  implements  of 
popish  idolatry.  Though  the  parishes  were  filled  with  popish 
priests,  the  people  were  generally  eager  for  the  Reformation. 
"  Having  been  provoked  with  the  cruelties  of  the  late  times, 
they  attended  the  Commissioners  in  great  numbers,  and  brought 
into  Cheapside,  St.  Paul's  Churchyard,  and  Smithfield,  the 
roods  and  crucifixes  that  were  taken  down  ;  and  in  some  places 
the  vestments  of  the  priests,  copes,  surplices,  altar  cloths,  books, 
banners;  and  burnt  them  to  ashes,  as  it  were,"  says  Neale,  "  to 
make  atonement  for  the  blood  of  the  martyrs  which  had  been 
shed  there."  "  They  broke  the  painted  windows,  rased  out 
ancient  inscriptions,  and  spoiled  the  monuments  of  the  dead 
that  had  any  ensigns  of  Popery  on  them."  Though  few  of  the 
popish  priests  left  their  parishes,  yet  such  were  the  terms  of  con- 
formity that  it  was  not  possible  to  find  Protestants  of  a  tolerable 
capacity  to  supply  the  vacancies.  There  were,  indeed,  educated, 
true  and  tried  men  enough,  but  because  they  could  not  comply 
with  the  queen's  injunctions  they  were  shut  out.  Many  places 
were  long  left  vacant;  others  were  filled  with  ignorant  me- 
chanics. The  Bishop  of  Bangor  wrote  that  he  had  only  two 
preachers  in  his  diocese.  And  Bishop  Parker  found  the  major 
part  of  his  beneficed  clergy  "  either  mechanics  or  Mass- Priests, 
in  disguise  ;  many  churches  were  shut  up,  and  in  some  of  those 
that  were  open,  not  a  sermon  was  to  be  heard  in  some  counties 
within  the  compass  of  twenty  miles."  So  many  country  towns 
and  villages  were  vacant,  that  in  some  places  there  was  no 
preaching,  nor  so  much  as  reading  a  homily  for  many  months 
together.  In  sundry  parishes  it  was  hard  to  find  clerical  persons 
to  bury  the  dead.  In  the  meantime  multitudes  of  able  and 
learned  preachers  who  had  proved  their  faith  in  times  of  persecu- 


94  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

tion,  were  shut  out  of  the  churches  because  they  could  not 
conform  to  the  habits  and  ceremonies  without  violence  to  their 
conscience.  Among  these  was  Miles  Cover  dale,  one  of  the  first 
translators  of  the  Bible,  a  bishop  under  King  Edward  VI,  and 
an  exile  (barely  escaping  martyrdom)  under  Queen  Mary. 
When  Queen  Elizabeth  wanted  Parker  to  be  consecrated  arch- 
bishop, she  could  use  Coverdale  to  serve  the  turn  ;  but  when 
this  was  done  he  might  not  preach  the  Gospel  even  as  a  parish 
minister.  Grindal,  who  had  been  his  fellow  sufferer  in  distress 
and  exile,  at  length  ventured  to  give  him  a  small  living;  but  he 
was  persecuted  thence  and  soon  after  died  in  penury  at  the  age 
of  eighty-one.  "  The  act  of  Uniformity  brought  down  his  reve- 
rend hairs  with  sorrow  to  the  grave."  Vast  crowds  of  people 
testified  their  affection  by  attending  his  funeral  John  Fox,  the 
martyrologist,  whose  writings  gave  a  severer  blow  to  Popery  in 
England,  than  any  other  human  work,  was  for  a  long  time  left  in 
distressing  poverty,  "  till  at  last,  by  the  intercession  of  a  great 
friend,  he  obtained  a  prebend  in  the  church  of  Sarum,  which, 
with  some  disturbance,  he  held  till  death." 

Though  the  Puritan  preachers  were  shut  out  of  the  churches, 
their  principles  had  taken  strong  hold  on,  probably,  the  largest 
share  of  the  Protestant  clergy  in  the  land. 

In  the  year  A.  D.  1562,  the  convocation  of  the  clergy  met, 
with  the  queen's  license,  to  review  the  doctrine  and  discipline 
of  the  Church.  A  petition  was  introduced  by  Bishop  Sandys 
and  others,  for  doing  away  a  long  list  of  ceremonies  and  other 
things  deemed  abuses  or  superstitions.  Among  other  things,  the 
cross  in  baptism  was  to  be  dispensed  with  ;  kneeling  at  the  com- 
munion was  not  to  be  required ;  copes  and  surplices  were  to  be 
taken  away ;  saints'  days,  festivals  and  holy-days  bearing  the 
names  of  a  creature,  were  to  be  abrogated ;  or  at  least,  after 
service  on  such  days  men  were  to  be  allowed  to  go  to  their 
work.  A  motion  was  made  embodying  most  of  the  things 
desired  in  these  petitions ;  and  after  an  earnest  debate,  the  vote 
being  taken,  upon  a  division,  a  majority  of  those  present  ap- 
proved the  motion  for  alteration  ;  the  vote  standing  forty-three  to 
thirty-five.  But  on  counting  the  votes  of  absentees,  given  by 
proxy,  the  scale  was  turned  by  ONE  VOICE  !  So  near  were  the 
clergy  of  England  to  approving  the  chief  demands  of  the  Puri- 
tans, the  first  time  they  were  allowed  to  express  their  sentiments 
on  the  subject. 

It  has  been  common  for  the  advocates  of  Prelacy  to  ascribe 
the  rise  of  Puritanism  to  the  influence  of  Geneva.  But  to  say 
nothing  of  the  Puritanism  of  Wickliffe,  or  the  Puritan  Churches 
meeting  in  secret  under  the  reign  of  the  Bloody  Mary,  here  is 
a  singular  refutation  of  the  charge,  in  this  vote  of  the  English 


THE    CONFLICT    OP    PRINCIPLE.  95 

convocation;  from  .which  all  avowed  Puritans  were  shut  out. 
In  that  vote  is  found  the  name  of  only  one  who  had  been  of  the 
English  Church  at  Geneva.  Seventeen  had  been  of  the  exiles 
of  Strasburg,  and  of  the  Second  Church  at  Frankfort,  who  had 
all  strenuously  contended  with  their  brethren  for  the  use  of  King 
Edward's  Liturgy.  On  the  other  side  were  two  deacons  and 
two  archdeacons,  who  had  complied  with  the  popish  religion 
under  Queen  Mary,  and  who,  after  the  accession  of  Queen  Eliza- 
beth, adhered  to  Popery  till  they  were  compelled  to  abandon  it 
or  lose  their  places. 

Many  of  the  parochial  clergy  had  a  strong  aversion  to  the 
"  habits."  "  They  wore  them  sometimes  in  obedience  to  the 
laws,  but  more  frequently  administered  without  them ;"  for  which 
some  were  cited  into  the  spiritual  courts  and  admonished  ;  the 
Bishops  not  as  yet  proceeding  to  the  extremity  of  deprivation. 
"  The  laity  were  more  averse  to  the  habits  than  the  clergy.  As 
their  hatred  of  Popery  increased,  so  did  their  aversion  to  the 
garments."  There  was  a  strong  party  in  the  court  against  them ; 
among  whom  were  the  Earl  of  Leicester,  Walsingham  and  Bur- 
leig-h.  "  The  Protestant  populace  throughout  the  nation  were 
so  inflamed,  that  nothing  but  an  awful  subjection  to  authority 
could  have  kept  them  within  bounds.  Great  numbers  refused 
to  frequent  the  places  of  worship  where  service  was  ministered 
in  that  dress.  They  would  not  salute  such  ministers  in  the 
streets,  nor  keep  them  company."  "  Nay,"  as  Neale  goes  on  to 
say,  "  if  we  may  believe  Dr.  Whitgift,  they  spit  in  their  faces, 
reviled  them  as  they  went  along,  and  showed  such  like  behavior 
because  they  took  them  for  Papists  in  disguise,  for  time-servers, 
and  half-faced  Protestants,  that  would  be  content  with  the  return 
of  that  religion  whose  badge  they  wore.  There  was  indeed  a 
warm  spirit  in  the  people  against  everything  which  came  from 
that  pretended  Church,  whose  garments  had  been  so  lately  dyed 
with  the  blood  of  their  friends  and  relations." 

The  admonitions  of  the  bishops  failing  to  check  the  growing 
non-conformity,  the  queen  was  greatly  displeased,  and  issued 
peremptory  orders  to  the  archbishops  to  enforce  the  strictest  uni- 
formity. And  now  the  storm  was  coming.  Many  of  the  bishops 
earnestly  begged  that  they  might  not  be  compelled  to  be  made 
the  instruments  of  oppression  against  those  who  could  not  in 
conscience  conform.  Pilkington,  Bishop  of  Durham,  urged 
"  That  compulsion  ought  not  to  be  used  in  things  of  liberty  :" — 
"  that  all  the  reformed  countries  had  cast  away  the  popish  appa- 
rel, and  yet  we  contend  to  keep  it  as  a  holy  relic ;"  "  That  many 
ministers  would  rather  leave  their  livings  than  comply,  while  the 
realm  had  a  great  scarcity  of  teachers,  many  places  being  desti- 


96  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

tute  of  any."*  Whittingham,  Dean  of  Durham,  wrote,  that  he 
"  Dreaded  the  consequences  of  imposing  that  as  necessary,  which 
at  best  was  only  indifferent;"  "that  many  Papists  enjoyed  their 
livings  and  liberty,  who  have  not  sworn  obedience  nor  do  any 
part  of  their  duty  to  their  miserable  flock."  "  Alas,"  said  he, 
"  that  such  compulsion  should  be  used  towards  us,  and  such 
lenity  towards  the  Papists."  Jewell,  who  was  set  to  preach  at 
Paul's  Cross,  to  reconcile  the  people  to  the  garments>  said, "  He  did 
not  come  to  defend  them,  but  to  show  that  they  might  be  com- 
plied with."  Piikington  urged  again  that  the  debate  which 
began  about  the  vestments,  "  now  goes  farther,  and  reaches  hold 
on  the  very  constitution  of  the  Church  ;" — and  to  the  Puritans 
he  said,  "  1  confess  we  suffer  many  things  against  our  hearts, 
groaning  under  them-;  but  we  cannot  take  them  away.  We  are 
under  authority,  and  can  innovate  nothing  without  the  queen."f 
Grindal)  who  had  some  time  hesitated  whether  he  could  accept 
a  bishopric  with  the  popish  garments, — now  called  God  to 
witness  that  it  does  not  lie  at  their  [the  bishops]  door  that  the 
habits  were  not  taken  quite  away."  Sandys  Bishop  of  Worces- 
ter, and  Parkhurst  Bishop  of  Norwich,  inveighed  bitterly  against 
the  habits,  and  declared  they  would  not  cease  to  cry  out  against 
them,  "  till  they  were  sent  to  hell  from  whence  they  came."  J  The 
Bishop  of  Rochester  wrote  to  the  Secretary  Cecil,  that  in  his 
opinion  "  the  habits  ought  to  be  taken  away ;  and  that  men  ought 
to  stand  fast  in  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  had  made  them  free." 
Not  one  of  the  first  set  of  bishops  after  the  Reformation,  ap- 
proved of  the  habits  or  argued  for  their  continuance  from  Scrip- 
ture, antiquity,  or  decency ;  but  they  submitted  to  them  out  of 
necessity,  and  to  keep  the  Church  in  the  queen's  favor. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Puritan  ministers  said,  "  We  leave  our 
brethren  to  stand  or  fall  to  their  own  master  and  desire  the  same 
favorable  forbearance  from  them.  All  that  is  pretended  is,  that 
these  habits  are  not  unlawful, — not  that  they  are  good  and  expe- 
dient. They  were  not  used  in  the  Primitive  Church  ;  they  are 
of  papal  use  and  origin. — Why  are  we  now  turned  out  of  our 
benefices,  and  some  put  in  prison,  only  for  habits  ?" 

The  superintendent  ministers  of  Scotland  wrote  to  the  English 
bishops  with  true  Scotch  plainness:  "  If,"  said  they,  "the  sur- 
plice, corner  cap,  and  tippet,  have  been  the  badges  of  idolatry, 
what  have  the  preachers  of  Christian  liberty,  and  the  open  re- 
bukers  of  all  superstition,  to  do  with  the  dress  of  the  Romish 
beast  ?  Our  brethren,  that  of  conscience  refuse  that  unprofitable 
apparel,  do  neither  damn  yours,  nor  molest  you  that  use  such 
trifles.  If  ye  shall  do  the  like  by  them,  we  doubt  not  but  you 
will  therein  please  God,  and  comfort  the  heart  of  many."§ 
*  Neale.  t  Ibid.  }  Ibid.  §  Ibid. 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  PRINCIPLE.  97 

How  often,  and  how  falsely,  it  has  been  alleged  that  the  Puri- 
tans were  only  struggling  for  political  pre-eminency ;  that  it  was 
a  mere  contest  of  will,  to  determine  which  party  should  impose 
their  own  peculiar  forms  and  opinions  upon  the  others !  What  a 
strange  mode  these  men  adopted  to  gain  political  power  !  To 
give  themselves  up  to  poverty,  imprisonment,  fines,  banishment 
or  death,  and  to  continue  thus  to  suffer  from  generation  to  gene- 
ration! It  was  indeed  true,  that,  seventy  years  afterwards, 
when  nothing  was  left  the  nation  but  victory  or  the  entire  loss 
of  freedom,  the  friends  of  liberty  with  one  consent  rallied 
round  the  Puritans,  its  oldest  and  most  unconquerable  defenders. 
Then  the  strife  was  not  by  the  Puritans  alone,  but  by  all  men 
who  stood  for  their  liberties.  But  for  two  entire  generations,  the 
Puritans,  as  such,  only  stood  and  suffered  for  conscience'  sake 
alone.  Long  after  this  time,  even  as  late  as  the  reign  of  King 
James,  a  work  of  Dr.  Ames,  entitled  "  English  Puritanism" 
declared  the  principles  and  demands  of  the  Puritans  :  "  All 
we  crave  of  his  majesty  and  the  state,  is,  that  with  his  and  their 
permission,  it  may  be  lawful  for  us  to  worship  God  according  to 
his  revealed  will ;  that  we  may  not  be  forced  to  the  observance  of 
any  human  rites  and  ceremonies;  so  long  as  it  shall  please  the  king 
and  parliament  to  maintain  the  hierarchy  or  prelacy  in  this  king- 
dom, we  are  content  that  they  enjoy  their  state  and  dignity ;  and 
we  will  live  as  brethren  among  the  ministers  that  acknowledge 
spiritual  homage  to  the  spiritual  lordships,  paying  them  all 
temporal  duties  of  tithes,  and  joining  with  them  in  the  service 
and  worship  of  God  so  far  as  we  may  without  our  own  particu- 
lar communicating  in  those  human  traditions  which  we  judge  un- 
lawful. Only  we  pray  that  the  prelates  and  their  ecclesiastical 
officers  may  not  be  our  judges ;  but  that  we  may  stand  at  the 
bar  of  the  civil  magistrate ;  and  that  if  we  shall  be  openly  vilified 
and  slandered,  it  may  be  lawful  for  us,  without  fear  of  punish- 
ment, to  justify  ourselves  to  the  world ;  and  then  we  shall  think 
our  lives  and  all  we  have,  too  little  to  spend  in  the  service  of  our 
king  and  country."* 

But  the  queen  and  archbishop  pressed  on.  There  must  be 
entire  conformity,  or  ruin  to  those  who  opposed.  It  may  well  be 
left  to  our  American  public  to  judge  what  right  the  queen  had  to 
impose  such  things  upon  her  Christian  subjects ;  and  how  the 
bishops  could  be  justified  in  allowing  themselves  to  be  made  the 
instruments  of  imposing  with  such  fearful  rigors,  things  which, 
in  the  judgment  of  so  many  intelligent  and  godly  people,  were 
absolutely  sinful.  But  no  man  could  be  a  bishop  in  those  days 
without  yielding  this  submission  to  arbitrary  power. 

In  obedience  to  the  queen,  the  Commission  now  forbade  all 
7  *  Neale. 


98  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

preachers  throughout  the  realm,  the  exercise  of  their  office  with- 
out a  promise  under  the  hand  of  each,  of  an  absolute  conformity 
in  all  things.  Archbishop  Parker  cited  the  Puritan  clergy  of 
London  to  Lambeth,  and  threatened  them.  The  Puritan  clergy 
sent  him  "  a  humble  supplicatory  letter,"  protesting  before  God 
that  it  was  a  bitter  grief  to  them  to  be  obliged  to  refuse  obedience. 
They  pleaded  the  ancient  and  primitive  toleration  of  a  variety  of 
rites  and  forms;  they  pleaded  the  injunction  of  Paul  respecting 
things  indifferent;  "Let  not  him  that  eateth  despise  him  that 
eateth  not."  "  Let  every  one  be  fully  persuaded  in  his  own 
mind."  "  All  men,"  said  they,  "  cannot  look  upon  the  same 
things  as  indifferent ;  if,  therefore,  these  habits  seem  so  to  you, 
you  are  not  to  be  condemned  by  us ;  on  the  other  hand,  if  they  do 
not  appear  so  to  us,  we  ought  not  to  be  vexed  by  you.  *  *  Where- 
fore we  most  humbly  pray,  that  a  thing  which  is  the  care  and 
pleasure  of  the  Papists,  and  which  you  have  no  great  value  for 
yourselves,  and  which  we  refuse  not  from  any  contempt  of 
authority,  but  from  an  aversion  to  the  common  enemy,  may  not 
be  our  snare  and  crime"*  But  the  archbishop  brought  them 
before  the  court  of  High  Commission,  and  told  them  peremp- 
torily that  they  should  conform  to  the  habits,  i.  e.  wear  the 
square  cap  and  no  hats,  in  their  long  gowns  ;  wear  hoods  in  the 
choir,  and  communicate  kneeling,  in  wafer  bread,  or  suffer 
punishment.  Some  declining  to  promise  this,  were  sent  to 
prison.  Others,  who  would  not  enter  into  bonds  to  wear  the 
square  cap,  were  deprived  of  their  office  and  benefices. 

The  clergy  of  London  were  now  called  before  the  High  Corn- 
mission.  A  man  clothed  cap-a-pie,  in  their  priestly  garments, 
was  placed  before  them.  The  bishop's  chancellor  said  to  them 
from  the  bench,  "  My  masters  and  ye  ministers  of  London,  the 
council's  pleasure  is  that  ye  strictly  keep  the  unity  of  apparel 
like  this  man  who  stands  here  canonically  habited  with  a  square 
cap,  a  scholar's  gown,  priest-like,  a  tippet  in  the  church,  and  a 
linen  surplice ;  ye  that  will  subscribe,  write  volo  [I  will] ;  those 
that  will  not  subscribe,  write  Nolo  [I will  not].  Be  brief;  make 
no  words  :  Apparitor,  call  over  the  churches ;  and  ye  ministers 
and  masters,  answer  presently  under  penalty  of  contempt." 

Sixty-one  subscribed ;  thirty-seven  refused  and  were  presently 
suspended.  Archbishop  Parker  said,  "  He  did  not  doubt,  that 
when  the  ministers  had  felt  the  smart  of  poverty  and  want,  they 
would  yet  comply,  for  the  wood  was  yet  green." 

The  secretary  of  state  declared  he  could  not  keep  pace  with 
the  archbishop.  Grindal  relented.  The  Bishop  of  Durham 
declared  he  would  rather  lay  down  his  office  than  suffer  such 

*Neale. 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  PRINCIPLE.  99 

proceedings  in  his  diocese :  but  the  archbishop  was  above  him, 
and  pressed  on. 

The  Court  of  High  Commission  now  required  every  clergy- 
man having  the  care  of  souls,  to  take  an  oath,  that  he  would  be 
obedient :  1.  To  all  the  queen's  injunctions  by  letters  patent ; 
2.  To  all  letters  from  the  lords  of  the  privy  council  ;  3.  To  the 
articles  and  mandates  of  his  metropolitan;  4.  To  the  articles 
and  mandates  of  his  bishop,  archdeacon,  chancellor,  &c.,  &c., — 
in  a  word  "  to  be  subject  to  the  control  of  all  his  superiors  with 
patience."  "  To  gird  these  injunctions  the  closer,"  says  Neale, 
"  there  were  appointed  in  every  parish  four  or  eight  censors, 
spies,  or  jurats,"  who  "  were  under  oath  to  take  particular  notice  of 
the  conformity  of  the  clergy  and  of  the  parishioners  ;  and  to  give 
in  their  presentments  when  required ;  so  that  it  was  impossible 
for  an  honest  Puritan  to  escape  the  High  Commissioner." 

These  were  but  the  beginnings  of  the  milder  measures  of  the 
queen  and  the  hierarchy  to  put  down  the  spirit  and  principles 
of  the  Puritans.  And  yet  Maddox,  so  famous  for  his  work 
against  the  Puritans,  extols  the  purity,  the  moderation,  and  the 
dear  regard  for  liberty,  exercised  by  "  Mother  Church"  He 
makes  it  the  very  ground  of  his  argument  that  the  Puritans  were 
treated  with  unmerited  mildness,  consideration,  and  forbearance  : 
that  the  bishops  only  used  their  legitimate  powers ;  and  used 
them  not  only  with  a  moderation  greatly  to  be  commended,  but 
which  should  have  subdued  and  won  the  Puritans  into  a  meek 
and  grateful  submission ! 

The  persecution  went  on  against  the  non-conforming  minis- 
ters, till  a  fourth  part  of  the  ministers  were  suspended  ;*  among 
whom  were  the  principal  preachers,  at  a  time  when  not  one  min- 
ister in  six  could  compose  a  sermon.  Many  churches  had  to  be 
closed  for  want  of  ministers  to  officiate.  The  secretary  wrote  to 
the  archbishop  to  supply  the  churches,  and  release  the  prisoners ; 
but  "  His  grace,"  says  Neale,  "  was  inexorable,  and  had  rather 
the  people  should  have  no  sermon  or  sacraments,  than  have  them 
without  the  surplice  and  cap."  The  archbishop  replied,  that 
when  the  queen  put  him  upon  what  he  had  done,  "  he  told  her 
that  these  precise  folks  would  offer  their  goods  and  their  bodies  to 
prison  rather  than  relent ;  and  her  highness  then  willed  him  to 
imprison  them."  He  confessed  that  many  parishes  were  unserved ; 
but  said  that  when  he  had  sent  his  chaplains  to  serve  in  some  of 
the  great  parishes,  they  could  not  administer  the  sacraments,  be- 
cause the  officers  of  the  parish  had  provided  neither  surplice  nor 
wafer  bread; — that  he  had  had  many  churchwardens  and  others 
before  him  ;  but  that  ke  was  fully  tired  ;  for  some  ministers  would 
not  obey  their  suspensions,  but  preached  in  defiance  of  them."f 

*  Bogue  and  Bennett — Hist.  Dissenters.  t  Neale. 


100  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

The  secretary  and  archbishop  wrote  to  G-rindal,  Bishop  of 
London,  to  fill  up  the  vacant  pulpits  ;  but  he  replied  that  it  was 
impossible,  there  being  no  preachers  ;  all  he  could  do  was  to 
supply  the  churches  by  turns  ;  which  was  far  from  stopping  the 
murmurs  of  the  people.  Such  was  the  state  of  things  in  Lon- 
don, where  the  mild  Grindal,  having  a  true  concern  to  promote 
the  preaching  of  the  Word  of  God,  would  not  act  against  the 
ministers  further  than  he  was  compelled  by  superior  power.  In 
other  parts  of  the  kingdom,  the  queen's  injunctions  were  rigidly 
executed,  and  the  state  of  things  was  worse. 

The  suspended  ministers  having  vainly  endeavored  to  procure 
toleration  from  the  queen  and  bishops,  now  (A.  D.  1566)  tried 
the  novel  and  anti-monarchical  mode  of  spreading  their  cause 
before  the  people.  With  the  throne  was  power ;  but  there  was 
another  tribunal — that  of  reason,  of  public  enlightened  senti- 
ment— from  whose  decision,  if  they  could  not  at  present  gain 
redress,  they  might  at  least  find  comfort.  They  gave  to  the 
press,  "  A  Declaration  of  the  doings  of  those  ministers  of  God's 
word  and  sacraments,  who  have  refused  to  wear  the  upper  apparel 
and  ministering  garments  of  the  Pope's  Church."  They  showed 
that  neither  prophets  nor  apostles  used  distinctive  garments; 
but  that  the  linen  garment  was  peculiar  to  the  sacrificing  priest, 
whose  office  and  work  was  entirely  diverse  from  that  of  apostles 
or  Christian  ministers  ;  that  this  distinction  of  garments  did  not 
obtain  generally  in  the  Christian  Church  till  after  the  rise  of 
Antichrist;  that  these  garments  had  been  abused  to  idolatry, 
sorcery,  and  all  kinds  of  conjuration  ;  that  the  popish  priests  can 
perform  none  of  their  pretended  consecrations  of  holy  water, 
transubstantiation,  or  conjurations  of  the  devil  out  of  pos- 
sessed persons  or  places,  without  a  surplice,  an  alb,  or  hallowed 
stole;  that  the  use  of  these  garments  is  an  offence  to  weak 
Christians,  leading  them  into  superstition  and  sin ;  that  at  best 
they  are  but  the  commandments  of  men,  and  that  they  came 
within  the  rule  of  the  apostle,  "  Why,  as  though  living  in  the 
world,  are  ye  subject  to  ordinances,  after  the  commandments  and 
doctrines  of  men  ?  Touch  not,  taste  not,  handle  not :" — and  that 
even  supposing  the  garments  to  be  indifferent,  yet  they  ought  not 
to  be  imposed,  because  it  was  an  infringement  of  that  liberty 
wherewith  Christ  had  made  them  free. 

The  bishops  answered  this  appeal.  The  Puritans  rejoined. 
Thus  was  the  issue  laid  before  the  bar  of  truth  and  reason,  with 
the  whole  universal  people  for  a  jury.  What  was  the  conse- 
quence ?  Puritanism  spread  as  if  both  parties  had  been  engaged 
in  scattering  brands  of  fire. 

The  bishops  left  the  field  of  argument,  and  resorted  to  author- 
ity. They  procured  a  decree,  1,  That  no  person  should 


THE    CONFLICT   OF    PRINCIPLE. 


101 


print  or  publish  against  the  queen's  injunctions,  set  forth,  or  to  be 
set  forth,  or  against  the  meaning  of  them  :  2,  That  no  person  shall 
sell,  bind,  or  stitch  such  book ; — and  by  various  provisions  of  this 
sort,  they  endeavored  to  silence  the  declaration  of  those  princi- 
ples which  neither  their  arguments  had  been  able  to  resist,  nor 
their  former  persecutions  to  repress. 

So  long  as  the  Puritan  ministers  were  allowed  to  preach,  they 
had  been  acknowledged  to  be  the  most  conscientious,  laborious, 
and  efficient  preachers  in   the  kingdom.     And  many,  after  they 
were  deprived,  braving  all  dangers,  travelled  up  and  down  the 
country,  preaching  wherever  people  could  be  gathered  to  hear~^_ 
"  The  Puritans,"  said  Burleigh  [one  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  minis-       / 
ters  of  state],   "  are  over-squeamish  and  nice,  yet  their  careful  \/ 
catechising  and  diligent  preaching  diminish  the   papistical  num- 
bers."    And  Bancroft,  the  American  historian,   has  justly  said 
that  "  The  party  thus  persecuted  were  most  efficient  opponents  of 
Popery ;"  and  that  "  but  for  the  Puritans,  the  old  religion  would 
have  retained  the  affections  of  the  multitude.     If  Elizabeth  re- 
formed the  court,  the   ministers  whom  she   persecuted  reformed      > 
the  commons.     THAT  THE  ENGLISH    NATION  BECAME   PROTEST-V/ 
ANT,  is  DUE  TO  THE  PURITANS."     "  How  then,"  he  asks,  "could 
the  party  be  subdued  ?    The  spirit  of  brave  and  conscientious  men 
cannot  be  broken.     No  part  is  left  but  to  tolerate  or  destroy." 

It  was  now  eight  years  since  Elizabeth  ascended  the  throne. 
The  only  prospect  before  the  Puritans  w:.:  'hat  of  a  surrender 
of  their  liberties  ;  an  entire  submission  to  despotic  power ;  a 
giving  up  of  the  truth  to  a  gradual  relapse  into  the  errors  and 
superstition  and  bondage  of  a  scheme  of  religion  little  better 
than  Popery;  or  to  make  a  stand:  to  worship  God  according 
to  their  conscience,  whatever  consequences  might  ensue.  They 
had  attended  the  parochial  churches  as  long  as  their  consciences 
and  the  fury  of  their  persecutors  would  allow.  Multitudes  had 
gathered  round  their  old  deprived  ministers  for  instruction, 
counsel  and  comfort ;  often  had  these  ministers  spoken  to  them  the 
words  of  eternal  life,  and  often  had  they  joined  in  prayer  to  God. 

At  length  the  question  arose :  shall  we  worship  God  accord- 
ing to  his  Word?  shall  we  enjoy  the  ordinances  enjoined  by 
Christ?  These  are  our  ministers;  they  have  been  unjustly 
deprived  by  the  secular  power.  Shall  they  break  to  us  the  bread 
of  life  ?  or  must  we  return  and  submit  to  what  we  cannot  sub- 
mit without  violating  our  conscience,  betraying  the  truth,  proving 
traitors  to  freedom  and  to  God,  or  must  we  be  cut  off  for 
ever  from  Christian  ordinances  ? 

Long  and  prayerful  were  these  deliberations.  The  conclu- 
sion was,  that  they  ought  to  meet  to  worship  God,  and  to  keep 
the  ordinances  enjoined  by  Christ.  Their  pastors  were  already 


102  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ordained,  and  had  never  been  forsaken.  THEY  VENTURED  TO 
USE  THEIR  FREEDOM  TO  WORSHIP  GOD.  The  year  of  our  Lord 
1566  was  the  year  of  this  memorable  decision,  from  which 
so  important  consequences  have  flowed.  Few  of  the  Puri- 
tans, however,  separated  themselves  at  first.  The  greater  part, 
though,  clear  as  to  the  right,  were  yet  reluctant  to  separate, 
nor  did  they  have  recourse  to  so  unwelcome  an  expedient, 
till,  after  many  years  of  suffering,  they  were  compelled  to 
despair  of  ever  finding  liberty  of  conscience  in  the  Church 
established  and  controlled  by  the  power  of  the  state.  The  queen, 
hearing  that  some  ventured  to  worship  God  in  private,  gave  strict 
orders  to  the  High  Commission  to  keep  the  people  to  the 
parish  churches.  On  the  19th  of  June,  1567,  a  congregation  of 
separate  worshippers  was  detected  by  the  sheriff  at  Plumber's 
Hall  ;  a  large  number  were  taken  into  custody,  and  sent  to 
prison,  where  they  were  kept  in  confinement  more  than  a  year  ; 
when  twenty-four  men  and  seven  women  were  discharged  with 
an  admonition  to  conduct  better  for  the  future.  The  strictest 
watch  was  kept  up  by  the  spies  of  the  High  Commission.  The 
cruel  persecutions  of  the  Protestants  in  France,  and  the  mas- 
sacres perpetrated  by  the  Duke  of  Alva  in  the  Netherlands,  drove 
multitudes  from  these  countries  for  refuge  to  England.  The 
queen  granted  to  these  the  liberty  of  their  own  modes  of  worship  ; 
but  not  the  least  toleration  was  granted  to  her  own  subjects. 
The  prisons  were  soon  filled  with  the  persecuted  Puritans. 

In  the  year  1568  a  league  was  formed  by  the  Catholic  powers 
of  Europe,  by  which  all  Protestant  princes  were  to  be  put  down 
and  the  Protestant  religion  exterminated.  Many  of  the  Papists 
in  England  rose  to  arms.  The  Pope,  for  their  encouragement, 
denounced  the  queen  as  a  usurper  and  heretic  ;  absolved  all 
her  subjects  from  their  oaths  of  allegiance,  and  anathematized  all 
who  should  defend  her.  But  papal  bulls  had  lost  their  power 
in  England.  The  Romish  rebellion  melted  away  upon  the  very 
rumor  of  the  approach  of  the  queen's  army  ;  and  the  assistance, 
in  men  and  money,  which  she  with  consummate  statesmanship 
furnished,  at  the  right  time,  to  the  Protestants  of  France  and  Hol- 
land, defeated  all  the  designs  and  preparations  of  the  Romish 
league.  These  disturbances  called  forth  the  enactment  of  new 
laws,  and  the  imposition  of  new  oaths,  aimed  principally  against 
the  adherents  of  the  Pope.  But  though  no  part  of  the  queen's 
subjects  were  so  thoroughly  imbued  with  an  utter  abhorrence  of 
the  popish  claims  and  principles  ;  and  though  in  the  late  dis- 
turbances none  had  been  more  loyal  and  faithful  than  the  Puri- 
tans, the  "  edge  of  the  laws  that  were  made  against  Popish  recu- 
sants was  turned  against  the  Protestant  Non-conformists."* 

*  Neale. 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  PRINCIPLE.  103 

This  unrighteous  severity,  instead  of  bringing  these  non-con- 
formists into  the  churches,  like  all  other  methods  of  severity,  drove 
them  farther  from  it.  "  Many  of  the  people  were  put  in  prison 
because  they  would  not  provide  godfathers  and  godmothers  for 
baptizing  their  children.  While  the  Puritan  ministers  are  de- 
prived, the  Papists  comply  and  triumph."*  "  In  1569,  and 
before,  Papists  were  frequent  in  church,  in  court,  in  place ; 
Popish  priests  stiJl  enjoyed  the  great  ecclesiastical  livings,  with- 
out recantation  or  penance  ;  yea,  in  simoniacal  heaps,  cathedral 
churches"  were  "  stuffed  with  them  ;  the  very  spies  and  promot- 
ers of  Queen  Mary's  reign  were  cherished."f  The  Puritans 
were  harassed  with  increasing  vigor.  "  Many  were  cited  into 
spiritual  courts,  and  after  long  attendance  and  great  charges, 
were  suspended  or  deprived.  The  pursuivant,  or  messenger  of 
the  court,  was  paid  by  the  mile  ;  the  fees  were  exorbitant,  which 
the  prisoner,  innocent  or  otherwise,  must  pay  before  he  could 
have  his  discharge."  The  method  of  proceeding  was  dilatory 
and  vexatious.  "  Though  witnesses  were  seldom  called  to 
support  any  charge,  the  defendant  was  himself  put  under  oath 
to  answer  the  interrogations  of  the  court ;  and  compelled  to  turn 
his  own  accuser.  If  he  refused  the  oath,  they  examined  him 
without  it,  and  forced  him  to  submit  by  every  species  of  severity." 
If  the  prisoner  was,  after  all,  dismissed,  he  was  nevertheless 
generally  ruined  with  costs,  and  further  bound  to  appear  again 
whenever  the  court  should  require  him. 

The  sufferings  and  remonstrances  of  the  Puritans  had  now 
roused  the  nation.  In  several  sessions  of  parliament  from  1566 
to  1587  efforts  were  made  for  some  toleration  and  relief ;  but  the 
queen  frowned  upon  every  such  movement,  and  overawed  the 
parliament.  "  She  pretended,"  says  Hume,  "  that  in  quality  of 
supreme  head  of  the  Church,  she  was  fully  empowered  by  her 
prerogatives  alone,  to  decide  all  questions  which  might  arise 
with  regard  to  doctrine,  discipline,  or  worship ;  and  she  never 
would  allow  her  parliament  so  much  as  to  take  these  points  into 
consideration."  "The  parliament,  in  her  opinion,  were  not  to 
canvass  any  matters  of  state ;  still  less  were  they  to  meddle  with 
the  Church.  Questions  of  that  kind  were  far  above  their  reach, 
and  were  appropriated  to  the  prince  alone,  or  to  those  councils 
and  ministers  with  whom  she  was  pleased  to  entrust  them." 
"  What  then  was  the  office  of  parliament?  They  might  give 
directions  for  the  due  tanning  of  leather,  or  milling  of  cloth  ;  for 
the  preservation  of  pheasants  and  partridges  ;  for  the  reparation 
of  bridges  and  highways  ;  for  the  punishment  of  vagabonds  or 
common  beggars."  "  But  the  most  acceptable  part  of  parlia- 
mentary proceedings,  was  the  granting  of  subsidies  ;  the  attaint- 

*  Prince.  t  An  ancient  writer  quoted  by  Prince. 


104  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ing  and  punishing  of  the  obnoxious  nobility."*  "  The  redress 
of  grievances  was  sometimes  promised  to  the  people  ;  but  sel- 
dom could  have  place  while  it  was  an  established  rule  that  the 
prerogatives  of  the  crown  must  not  be  abridged,  or  so  much  as 
questioned  and  examined  in  parliament.  Even  those  monopo- 
lies and  exclusive  companies,  which  had  already  reached  an 
enormous  height,  and  were  every  day  increasing  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  all  industry  ; — it  was  criminal  in  a  member,  to  propose  in 
the  most  dutiful  manner,  a  parliamentary  application  against  any 

of  them."f 

The  Puritans,  in  their  debates  concerning  the  rights  of  con- 
science, had  been  led  to  investigate  the  principles  on  which 
these  monstrous  regal  prerogatives  were  founded  :  and  they  were 
not  only  first  and  foremost  in  every  effort  for  a  parliamentary  re- 
dress of  abusive  monopolies  and  other  grievances,  but  they 
alone  were  the  indefatigable  and  undaunted  opponents  of  royal 
despotism.  Was  there  a  motion  made  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, touching  these  abuses  and  prerogatives  which  the  queen 
guarded  with  such  a  jealous  vigilance  ?  That  motion  was  by  a 
Puritan.  Was  a  stirring  speech  made  in  parliament  exposing 
the  royal  and  ecclesiastical  abuses,  and  asserting  the  principles 
of  freedom  and  of  popular  rights  ?  That  speech  was  by  a  Puri- 
tan. High  Church  principles,  then  as  ever  afterwards,  were  uni- 
formly leagued  with  the  power  and  the  assumptions  of  the  sove- 
reign against  religious  tolerance  and  civil  liberty.  Hume  saw, 
and  abundantly  recorded,  in  his  history  of  the  doings  of  parlia- 
ment from  A.  D.  1571  to  1580,  the  connection  between  Puri- 
tanic principles  and  these  movements  in  favor  of  popular  rights. 
He  states  how  Strickland,  in  1571,  revived  one  of  the  seven  bills 
which  "  THE  PURITANS  "  had  introduced  into  the  former  parlia- 
ment for  a  further  reformation  of  religion.  The  parliament  even 
entered  upon  a  debate  for  a  reformation  of  the  Prayer-Book  ;  but 
the  queen,  incensed  at  the  presumption  of  Strickland,  summoned 
him  before  the  council,  and  prohibited  him  from  thenceforth 
appearing  in  the  House  of  Commons.  Again,  "  A  motion,"  says 
Hume,  "  was  made  by  Robert  Bell,  A  PURITAN,  against  an  exclu- 
sive patent  granted  to  some  merchants  in  Bristol."  Bell  \vas 
summoned  before  the  council,  and  "returned,"  says  Hume, 
"  with  such  an  amazed  countenance,  that  all  the  members,  well 
informed  of  the  reason,  were  struck  with  terror ;  and  during 
some  time  no  one  durst  rise  up  to  speak  of  any  matter  of  impor- 
tance, for  fear  of  giving  offence  to  the  queen  and  council ;" — 
"  And  yet,  that  patent  which  the  queen  defended  with  so  much 
violence,"  was  contrived  for  the  profit  of  the  courtiers,  and  was 
attended  with  the  utter  ruin  of  seven  or  eight  thousand  of  her 
*  Hume.  t  Ibid. 


THE  CONFLICT  OF  PRINCIPLE.  105 

industrious  subjects.  Again,  in  1576,  Peter  Wentworth,  whom 
Hume  characterizes  as  "  A  PURITAN,"  and  who  had  signalized 
himself  in  former  parliaments  by  his  free  and  undaunted  spirit, 
asserted  once  more  in  a  manly  speech  the  essential  principles  of 
liberty  ;  principles  which  are  now  so  clear  that  we  wonder  how 
they  could  ever  be  doubted  ;  but  which  were  novel  and  startling 
in  those  days  of  despotic  power.  Wentworth  was  sequestered 
from  the  house ;  and  taken  into  custody. 

It  is  in  connection  with  these  illustrations  of  the  natural 
affinity  between  Puritanism  and  freedom,  that  Hume  records 
that  sentence  which  has  been  so  long  and  so  justly  celebrated, 
viz  :  "  So  absolute  was  the  authority  of.  the  crown,  that  the  pre- 
cious spark  of  liberty  had  been  kindled,  and  was  preserved  by 
THE  PURITANS  ALONE  ;  and  it  was  to  this  sect  *  that  THE 
ENGLISH  OWE  THE  WHOLE  FREEDOM  OF  THEIR  CONSTITUTION." 

Thus  early  did  the  cause  of  purity  in  religious  worship  iden- 
tify itself  with  the  great  cause  of  civil  and  religious  freedom. 
Immense  were  the  sacrifices  with  which  these  principles  were 
maintained.  They  are  a  rich  legacy.  The  time  will  come 
when — in  this  world— —none  need  claim  a  nobler  parentage  than 
to  be  a  son  of  the  Puritans,  an  inheritor  of  their  principles  and 
their  piety.  • 


VIII 


THE    PURITANS    SUFFERING. 

New  Canons.  Supplication  to  Parliament.  Cartwright  and  Whitgift. 
Private  Press.  New  Persecuting  Act.  Brown  and  the  Brownists. 
Supplication  of  the  Deprived  Ministers.  Whitgift's  Inquisitorial  Arti- 
cles. Martin  Mar-Prelate.  Act  against  separate  Worship.  Sufferings 
of  the  Puritans.  Their  touching  Narrative.  Roger  Ripon.  Barrowe. 
Greenwood.  Penry. 

HAVING  stated  the  main  grounds  on  which  the  Puritans  rested 
their  complaints  and  their  defence,  and  having  shown  the  nature 
of  the  efforts  to  reduce  them,  we  may  now  pass  more  rapidly 
over  a  long  series  of  events,  consisting  mainly  of  a  continued 
recurrence  of  the  same  sort  of  doings.  You  have  only  to 
picture  to  yourselves  a  long  struggle  of  thirty-two  years,  from  this 
period  to  the  death  of  Elizabeth,  in  which  the  power  of  the 
queen,  the  council,  and  the  bishops,  with  their  chancellors  and 
spies,  was  exerted,  with  every  engine  of  oppression  ;  Star 
Chamber,  High  Commission,  oaths  ex  officio,  harassing  and 
expensive  prosecutions,  ruinous  fines  imposed  without  legal 
limit,  imprisonments,  excommunications  depriving  the  subject 
of  his  civil  rights;— imagine  these  engines  plied  with  relent- 
less severity,  against  all  who  should  omit  a  ceremony,  or  scru- 
ple a  habit,  or  say  a  word  against  the  Prayer-Book,  or  ques- 
tion the  authority  of  the  Bishops ;  then  picture  to  yourselves 
Puritanism  everywhere  spreading  and  increasing,  till  the  pri- 
sons are  full ;  families  broken  and  scattered ;  thousands  of 
women  and  children  in  distress,  till  a  voluntary  exile  or  banish- 
ment, or  death  fills  up  their  miseries  ;  imagine  all  this,  and  you 
have  a  true  outline  of  a  history  which  might  now  be  filled  up 
with  ample  and  heart-rending  details,  extending  through  the  life 
of  a  whole  generation.  Nor  did  these  persecutions  cease  when 
James  I.  ascended  the  throne  ;  but  new  modes  of  persecution 
and  still  fiercer  rigors  were  devised  by  that  conceited,  but  heart- 
less and  perfidious  prince ;  till  our  fathers  chose  a  home  on  the 
shores  of  a  howling  wilderness,  rather  than  endure  life  under 
such  tyranny  in  their  native  land. 


THE  PURITANS  SUFFERING.  107 

We  are  now  to  draw  a  rapid  outline  of  the  history  of  the 
thirty-two  remaining  years  of  Queen  Elizabeth. 

Though  the  Commons  were  forbidden  to  meddle  with  religion, 
they  still  ventured  to  present  an  humble  address  to  the  queen,  be- 
seeching her,  as  head  of  the  Church,  for  some  reformation  and 
relief.  The  deprived  ministers  at  the  same  time  petitioned  the 
Convocation  of  clergy  to  use  their  interest  with  the  queen  for 
a  redress  of  grievances.  "  If  a  godly  minister,"  s,ay  they, 
"  omit  but  the  least  ceremony  for  conscience'  sake,  he  is  immedi- 
ately indicted,  deprived,  cast  into  prison,  his  goods  wasted  and 
destroyed,  he  is  kept  from  his  wife  and  children,  and  at  last 
excommunicated." 

Instead  of  redress,  the  Convocation  framed  new  Canons,  to 
increase  the  burden  of  the  Puritans.  All  were  now  required 
to  subscribe  to  the  whole  Prayer-Book,  and  forms  of  ordina- 
tion ;  all  preachers  who  should  not  subscribe,  were  to  be  excom- 
municated. 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  summoned  before  him  the 
principal  clergy  of  both  provinces,  who  were  known  to  be  averse 
to  this  compulsory  uniformity,  and  let  them  know  that  if  they 
were  to  continue  their  ministry,  they  must  subscribe  and  con- 
form. 

Some  of  the  Puritan  ministers  drew  up  an  application  to  par- 
liament setting  forth  their  grievances,  and  calling,  in  the  spirit  of 
men  indignant  under  grievous  and  protracted  wrongs,  for  re- 
dress. Those  who  presented  this  petition  were  thrown  into  pri- 
son. Cartwright,  who  had  become  famous  for  his  courage  and 
perseverance  in  defending  the  Puritan  cause,  and  who  had  be- 
fore this  been  driven  into  exile,  immediately  drew  up  what  he 
called  an  "  Admonition  to  parliament  ;"  and  thus  commenced 
the  long  and  famous  controversy  between  Cartwright  and  the 
no  less  celebrated  Whitgift,  afterwards  archbishop.  Cartwright, 
on  the  side  of  the  Puritans,  maintained  that  "  The  Holy  Scriptures 
are  not  only  a  standard  of  doctrine,  but  of  discipline  and  govern- 
ment ;  and  that  the  Church  in  all  ages  is  to  be  regulated  by  them. 
Whitgift,  on  the  side  of  the  established  Church,  maintained  that 
the  Scriptures  are  not  a  rule  of  Church  discipline  or  government ; 
that  the  apostolical  government  was  adapted  to  the  Church  in  its 
infancy  and  persecution  ;  but  that  the  government  of  the  Church 
might  be  changed  to  adapt  itself  to  the  civil  constitution  and 
government  in  different  ages  and  countries :  and  on  this  ground 
he  defended  the  order,  organization,  and  worship  of  the  estab- 
lished Church  of  England."  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  "  The 
Judicious  Hooker"  takes  the  same  ground.  The  Divine  right 
of  the  constitution  and  order  of  the  Church  of  England,  its  ad- 
vocates had  not,  as  yet,  attained  the  hardihood  to  maintain. 


108  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

They  rested  its  claims,  not  on  the  institutions  of  the  Word  of 
God,  but  on  the  power  of  the  Church  to  arrange  its  own  polity, 
or  rather  on  the  power  of  every  Christian  civil  government  to 
regulate  the  polity  of  the  Church  according  to  their  will.  "  To 
reckon  bishops  and  priests  as  the  same  office  "  [i.  e.  as  to  their 
order]  Burnet  declares,  in  his  History  of  the  Reformation,  to  have 
been  "  the  common  style  of  the  age"* 

The  queen,  whether  distrusting  the  prowess  of  Whitgift  or 
otherwise,  took  it  upon  herself  to  answer  his  opponent  with  re- 
gal arguments.  She  issued  her  proclamation,  requiring  all  her 
subjects  who  had  any  copies  of  Cartwright's  Admonition,  to 
bring  them  to  their  bishops,  and  not  sell  them,  under  pain  of  im- 
prisonment. The  issue  of  the  debate  was  according  to  the  cus- 
tom of  the  times  :  Whitgift  was  in  due  time  made  an  Arch- 
bishop ;  Cartwright  was  reduced  to  beggary  and  exile. 

No  man  now  might  open  his  mouth  against  the  "  Church  "  or 
the  Hierarchy,  or  plead  for  the  Puritans,  without  ruin:  no 
press  in  the  whole  kingdom  might  openly  advocate  their  cause. 
In  this  emergency  some  persons  procured  a  press  which  they 
worked  in  private,  removing  it  from  time  to  time  to  prevent  dis- 
covery. The  pamphlets  printed  at  this  press  were  scattered  over 
the  land.  Who  could  destroy  them  ?  What  law  could  de- 
scribe them  all  ?  Who  could  tell  from  whence  they  came  ?  The 
queen  and  bishops  were  in  deep  trouble  ;  their  rage  was  baffled  ; 
their  power  was  vain.  Archbishop  Parker  used  every  art  to 
discover  this  press.  He  sent  out  emissaries;  he  employed 
spies ;  but  all  to  no  purpose.  Whereupon  he  vented  his  grief 
to  the  Lord  Treasurer :  "  I  understand,"  said  he,  "  throughout 
the  realm  how  the  matter  is  taken  ;  the  Puritans  are  justified, 
and  we  are  adjudged  to  be  extreme  persecutors."  The  queen 
rebuked  the  bishops  for  being  so  slow  in  putting  down  the  Pu- 
ritans ;  but  what  more  could  the  bishops  do  ?  In  every  shire 
commissioners  were  appointed  to  put  in  execution  the  penal 
laws  against  Puritans.  The  queen  by  proclamation  declared 
her  royal  pleasure  that  they  should  be  punished  with  the  utmost 
severity.  The  lords  of  the  council  added  their  authority  and 
efforts.  The  Lord  Treasurer  made  a  long  speech  to  the  Com- 
missioners in  the  Star  Chamber,  in  which,  "  by  the  queen's  com- 
mand, he  charged  them  with  neglect ;"  and  said,  "  The  queen 
could  not  satisfy  her  conscience  without  crushing'  the  Twitans"\ 
The  queen  said  repeatedly  that  "  She  hated  them  worse  than  the 
Papists. $ 

The  work  of  persecution  receiving  this  fresh  impulse,  went 
vigorously  on.  "  The  officers  of  the  spiritual  courts  planted  their 
spies  in  all  the  suspected  parishes  to  make  observation  of  those 

*  Vol.  i.,  p.  587.  t  Neale.  t  Ibid. 

I 


REIGN  OF  QUEEN  MARY.  109 

who  came  not  to  church.  *  *  The  keepers  [of  the  prisons] 
were  charged  to  take  notice  of  such  as  came  to  visit  the  prisoners 
or  to  bring  them  relief.  *  *  Spies  were  set  upon  these,  to  bring 
them  into  trouble.  *  *  The  conduct  of  the  Commissioners 
was  high-handed  and  imperious ;  their  under  officers  were 
ravenous  and  greedy  of  gain  ;  the  fees  of  the  court  were  exor- 
bitant, so  that  if  an  honest  man  fell  into  their  hands,  he  was  sure' 
to  be  half  ruined."* 

The  clergy  in  some  dioceses  had  been  accustomed  to  meet  for 
mutual  aid  in  studying  and  expounding  the  Scriptures.  These 
exercises  had  gone  under  the  name  of  Prophest/ing'S.  The  arch- 
bishop told  the  queen  that  those  meetings  were  "  little  better  than 
seminaries  of  Puritanism"  (and  quite  likely  they  were  so,  since 
in  them,  godly  men  met  to  confer  about  the  sense  and  doctrine 
of  the  Scriptures).  The  archbishop,  moreover,  declared  to  the 
queen  that  "  The  more  averse  the  people  were  to  popery,  the 
more  they  were  in  danger  of  non-conformity"  (nor  shall  we  be 
inclined  to  doubt  this  also)  ;  "  that  these  exercises  [of  Prophesy- 
ings,  or  conference  meetings]  tended  to  popularity,  and  made 
the  people  so  inquisitive  that  they  would  not  submit  to  the  orders 
of  their  superiors  as  they  ought."  The  queen  thereupon  ordered 
these  meetings  to  be  suppressed. 

'Bat  the  people,  as  well  as  the  ministers,  seem  to  have  been 
seized  with  this  same  mania  for  meeting  and  studying  the  Word 
of  God.  Many  people  in  various  quarters  had  been  accustomed 
to  meet  together  on  the  holidays,  and  at  other  times  when  their 
work  was  done,  to  read  the  Scriptures,  and  to  confirm  one  another 
in  Christian  faith  and  duty.  The  Commissioners  ordered  the 
ministers  of  the  parishes  to  suppress  these  meetings.  The  people 
replied  that  they  had  conformed  to  the  orders  of  the  Church  ;  and 
that  they  only  met  together  after  dinner,  or  after  supper,  on  holi- 
days ;  and  that  only  for  the  mutual  instruction  of  themselves  and 
thfir  families  ;  for  the  reformation  of  their  manners ;  and  for  a 
further  acquaintance  with  the  Word  of  God.  "  For  heretofore," 
said  they,  "  we  have  spent  and  consumed  our  holidays  vainly ; 
in  drinking  at  the  ale-house,  and  playing  at  cards  and  dice,  and 
other  vain  pastimes ;"  and  "  we  thought  it  better  to  bestow  the 
time  in  soberly  and  godly  reading  the  Scriptures,  only  for  the 
purposes  aforesaid,  and  no  other."  But  to  do  even  this  was  re- 
garded (and  no  doubt  justly  regarded),  as  tending  to  Puritanism ; 
and  it  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  Episcopal  Hierarchy  has  not 
recovered  from  its  ancient  horror  of  conference  meetings  to  this 
day.  These  meetings  were  suppressed. 

Grindal,  who  succeeded  Archbishop  Parker,  A.  D.  1575, 
would  originally  have  been  a  Puritan,  had  he  not  felt  himself 

*  Neale. 


110  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

compelled  to  yield  to  the  necessity  of  the  times.  His  desire  was 
to  cherish  the  godly  ministers  who  had  been  deprived  for  non- 
conformity, rather  than  to  persecute  them.  He  ventured  not 
only  to  relax  these  persecutions,  but  to  remonstrate  with  the  queen. 
But.  Queen  Elizabeth  was  not  to  be  gainsayed,  even  by  the  Primate 
of  all  England.  By  an  order  from  the  Star  Chamber,  she  forth- 
with confined  him  to  the  house,  and  sequestered  him  from  his 
archiepiscopal  function  for  six  months ;  nor  could  he  ever  after- 
wards regain  her  favor.  The  work  of  persecution  went  on. 

An  act  of  parliament  was  now  passed,  providing  that  "  All 
persons  who  do  not  come  to  church,  or  chapel,  where  common 
prayer  is  said  according  to  the  act  of  uniformity,  shall  forfeit  £20 
a  month  to  the  queen,  and  shall  suffer  imprisonment  till  it  is 
paid.*  Those  who  should  be  absent  for  twelve  months,  besides 
their  former  fine,  should  be  bound  with  two  sufficient  sureties  in 
a  bond  of  £200,  for  their  future  compliance.  Every  schoolmas- 
ter who  should  not  come  to  Common  Prayer  was  to  forfeit  £10 
a  month,  be  disabled  from  teaching  school,  and  suffer  a  year's 
imprisonment.  The  effect  of  this  was  to  condemn  non-conform- 
ists to  perpetual  imprisonment. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  these  cruel  enactments,  and  the  fierce 
and  unrelenting  manner  in  which  these  laws,  canons  and  injunc- 
tions, were  enforced,  should  provoke  some  roughness  of  resolu- 
tion arid  some  asperity  of  language  among  the  thousands  who 
were  compelled  to  endure  such  things  for  so  many  years.  But 
these  complaints  were  hushed  with  new  and  unheard  of  laws. 
Any  who  should  "  devise,  write,  print,  or  set  forth,  any  book, 
rhyme,  ballad,  letter  or  writing,  containing  any  false,  seditious  or 
slanderous  matter,  to  the  defamation  of  the  queen's  majesty,"  &c., 
— should  suffer  death  and  loss  of  goods.  "  Sundry  Puritans," 
says  Neale,  "  were  put  to  death  by  virtue"  of  this  statute. 

The  period  to  which  we  are  now  arrived,  witnessed  the  rise  of 
the  BROWNISTS.  These  denied  the  Church  of  England  to  b&  a 
true  Church,  and  her  ministers  to  be  rightly  ordained.  The  dis- 
cipline of  the  Established  Church  they  denounced  as  anti- 
christian  ;  and  her  ordinances  and  sacraments  as  invalid.  Their 
first  congregation  was  gathered  in  1583.  In  some  respects  these 
people  maintained  some  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  Congre- 
gationalism ; — but  they  differed  from  Congregation alists  in  main- 
taining the  extreme  of  Independency,  in  making  the  minis- 
terial office  temporary,  and  the  minister  the  mere  creature  of  a 
congregation,  made  and  liable  to  be  made  at  their  pleasure, 
They  differed  from  all  other  Puritans  in  breaking  off  from  the 
communion  of  the  English  and  the  continental  churches;  re- 

*  Neale. 


THE    PURITANS    SUFFERING.  Ill 

fusing  not  only  to  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper  with  these,  but 
to  mingle  with  them  in  worship  and  prayer. 

Their  leader  was  Robert  Brown,  who  had  signalized  himself 
for  some  years  by  travelling  up  and  down  the  country,  inveighing 
with  exceeding  bitterness  against  the  doctrines  and  discipline  of 
the  Church ;  and  distinguished  as  much  for  being  arraigned  be- 
fore magistrates  and  committed  to  prisons ;  till,  as  he  used  to 
boast,  he  had  been  "  committed  to  thirty-two  prisons,  in  some  of 
which  he  could  not  see  his  hand  at  noon-day."  The  congrega- 
tion which  he  gathered  was  soon  dispersed;  and  himself  and  ad- 
herents forced  to  flee  the  kingdom.  At  Middleburgh,  in  Zealand, 
he  collected  his  Church.  In  1589,  he  returned  to  England;  became 
a  good  Churchman  ;  was  made  Rector  of  a  Church  in  the  Estab- 
lishment ;  grew  dissolute  and  passionate ;  led  a  miserable  life  ; 
and  at  length,  for  some  violent  misdemeanor,  was  carried  to  prison, 
where  he  died  in  1630, — a  poor  decrepit  miserable  man,  in  the 
81st  year  of  his  age. 

It  was  long  the  fashion — as  a  means  of  reproach — to  call  those 
who  separated  from  the  Established  Church,  Brownists.  The 
Puritans,  and  especially  the  Pilgrims,  ever  maintained  this  to  be 
unjust;  since  the  principles  of  Brown  were  peculiar  to  him  and 
his  immediate  followers,  while  the  principles  which  he  held  in 
common  with  the  Puritans  were  not 'discovered  by  Brown  ;  they 
were  as  old  as  Wickliffe ; — indeed,  as  the  Puritans  contended, 
they  were  as  old  as  the  Primitive  Church ;  as  old  as  the  New  Tes- 
tament itself. 

In  1583,  two  ministers,  Thacker  and  Copping-,  were  hanged, 
"for  spreading  certain  books,  seditiously  penned  by  Brown, 
against  the  Common  Prayer,  established  by  the  laws  of  the  realm." 
This  was  their  only  crime. 

In  the  same  year  Grindal  died ;  and  the  Archbishopric  of 
Canterbury  passed  into  the  hands  of  that  merciless  High  Church- 
man, Wliitgift.  All  non-conformists  were  forthwith  made  to  feel 
that  the  reins  had  been  transferred  to  sterner  hands.  In  the  very 
first  week  of  his  official  power,  he  issued  his  injunctions  forbid- 
ding all  preaching,  catechising,  and  praying  in  any  private  family, 
where  any  besides  the  family  were  present ;  requiring  a  rigorous 
conformity,  and  a  new  subscription  to  articles  which  he  therewith 
prescribed.  Two  hundred  and  thirty-three  ministers  wrere  forth- 
with suspended,  and  forty-nine  absolutely,  and  at  once,  deprived. 

The  deprived  ministers  made  a  supplication  to  the  lords  of 
the  Council.  "  We  commend,"  say  they,  "  to  your  honors'  com- 
passion our  poor  families ;  but  much  more  do  we  commend  our 
doubtful,  fearful,  and  distressed  consciences,  together  with  the 
cries  of  our  poor  people,  who  are  hungering  after  the  Word  of 
life,  and  are  now  as  sheep  having  no  shepherd."  They  declared 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

their  readiness  to  subscribe  to  the  doctrinal  articles,  and  to  the 
other  articles,  so  far  as  they  were  not  repugnant  to  the  Word  of 
God  ;  and  that  if  they  might  be  but  tolerated,  they  would  make 
no  disturbance  in  the  Church,  nor  separate  from  it.  "  We  dare 
not,"  said  they,  "  say  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  books  repug- 
nant to  the  Word  of  God,  till  we  are  otherwise  enlightened. 
We  humbly  pray  that  we  may  not  be  pressed  to  an  absolute  sub- 
scription, but  be  suffered  to  go  on  in  the  quiet  discharge  of  the 
duties  of  our  calling."  "  We  protest  before  God  and  our  Saviour 
Jesus  Christ,  that  if  by  any  means,  which  is  not  wicked,  we 
might  continue  still  our  labors  in  the  Gospel,  we  would  gladly 
and  willingly  do  anything  that  might  procure  that  blessing, 
esteeming  it  more  than  all  the  riches  in  the  world." 

The  people  of  their  congregations  sent  up  their  earnest  peti- 
tions : — "  Since  our  ministers  have  been  taken  from  us  for  not 
subscribing  to  certain  articles  neither  confirmed  by  the  law  of 
God  nor  of  the  land,  there  are  none  left  us  but  such  as  we  can 
prove  unfit  for  that  office,  being  altogether  ignorant,  having  been 
popish  priests,  or  shiftless  men  thrust  in  upon  the  ministry,  who 
knew  not  how  else  to  live;  men  of  no  business,  serving  men,  and 
the  basest  of  all  sorts  ;  and  which  is  most  lamentable,  as  they 
are  men  of  no  gifts,  so  they  are  of  no  common  honesty,  but 
rioters,  dicers,  drunkards,  and  offensive  livers."* 

Archbishop  Whitgift  was  inexorable.  He  blamed  the  coun- 
cil for  receiving  these  petitions.  He  declared  he  could  not  do 
his  duty  to  the  queen,  if  he  might  not  proceed  without  interrup- 
tion;  and  that  if  the  council  would  help  him,  he  would  soon 
bring  them  to  comply.  "  Thus,"  says  Neale,  "  this  great  pre- 
late, who  had  complied  with  the  popish  religion  and  kept  his 
place  in  the  University  through  all  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary, 
was  resolved  to  bear  down  all  opposition,  and  to  display  his 
sovereign  power  against  those  whose  consciences  were  not  as 
flexible  as  his  own."f 

Whitgift  now  called  fora  new  High  Commission,  "Because," 
said  he,  "  a  commission  may  search  for  books,  and  examine  the 
writers  and  publishers  on  oath,  which  a  bishop  cannot  do — be- 
cause the  commission  can  punish  by  fines,  which  are  very  com- 
modious to  the  government;  or  by  imprisonment,  which  will 
strike  the  more  terror  into  the  Puritans."  J  The  commission  was 
granted. 

The  archbishop  drew  up  twenty-four  articles  for  the  use  of  the 
High  Commission,  by  which  they  might  compel  any  man  on  his 
oath  to  answer  the  most  searching  interrogatories  concerning  his 

*  Neale. 

t  Maddox  blames  Neale  for  saying  that  Whitgift  had  conformed  to  Popery;  but 
Toulmin  shows  that  it  was  even  so  ;  as  indeed  otherwise  he  could  not  have  kept 
his  place.  $  Neale. 


THE    PURITANS    SUFFERING.  113 

own  doings  and  belief,  as  well  as  concerning  all  others  whom  he 
should  know  to  have  refused  conformity  in  any  particular.  If 
any  person  refused  this  oath,  he  must  suffer  the  punishment  of 
contempt,  by  fines  and  imprisonment  at  the  mercy  of  the  court. 

When  the  Lord  Treasurer  Burleigh  read  these  articles,  he 
wrote  to  the  archbishop,  thus  :  "  I  have  read  over  your  four-and- 
twenty  articles,  formed  in  a  Romish  style,  of  great  length  and 
curiosity,  to  examine  all  manner  of  ministers  in  this  time,  with- 
out distinction  of  persons,  to  be  executed  ex  officio  mero  ;  and 
I  find  them  so  curiously  penned,  so  full  of  branches  and  circum- 
stances, that  I  think  the  inquisition  of  Spain  used  not  so  many 
questions  to  comprehend  and  trap  their  priests"  "I  know  your 
canonists  can  defend  these,  with  all  their  particles ;  but  surely 
under  correction,  this  judicial  and  canonical  sifting  of  poor  min- 
isters, is  not  to  edify  or  reform."  "  According  to  my  simple 
judgment,  it  is  too  much  savoring  of  the  Romish  Inquisition,  and 
is  a  device  rather  to  seek  for  offenders,  than  to  reform  any." 

The  archbishop  and  High  Commission  pressed  on.  It  was 
alleged,  that  no  one  ought  to  be  held  to  accuse  himself ;  but  the 
admitted  principle  of  the  municipal  law  weighed  nothing  with 
the  archbishop.  It  was  alleged  that,  by  law,  no  man  should  be 
fined  beyond  his  estate  or  ability  ;  but  the  very  policy  and  prin- 
ciple of  the  High  Commission  was,  to  impose  ruinous  fines. 
"  For  worshipping  God  in  private  houses,  or  in  the  woods,  with- 
out the  help  of  the  Prayer-Book,  or  the  adornment  of  the  square 
cap,  and  cape,  and  surplice,"* — for  such  crimes,  "  many  were  re- 
duced to  the  last  extremity  of  want  and  suffering,  so  that  the 
very  jailors  were  touched  with  pity ;  testifying  that  the  prisoners 
had  not  wherewithal  to  purchase  food  or  clothing,  for  lack  of 
which  numbers  perished  in  prison."  And  yet  Bishop  Maddox 
contends  earnestly,  that  they  were  treated  with  great  leniency 
and  favor  by  "  Mother  Church,"  and  the  merciful  queen  ! 

In  the  meantime,  that  secret  press,  of  which  we  have  spoken, 
was  plied  with  diligence,  and  made  the  complaints  of  the  Puri- 
tans ring  loud  throughout  the  kingdom.  The  pamphlets  issued 
at  this  time  were  written  with  a  coarseness  and  bitterness  which 
the  leading  and  moderate  men  among  the  Puritans  disapproved ; 
but  with  such  force  of  argument,  with  such  clearness,  and  such 
home-thrusts  at  the  persecuting  prelates,  that  nothing  could  re- 
sist them.  The  bishops  were  stung  to  the  quick  ;  the  queen  was 
enraged  ;  the  kingdom  was  in  a  flame. 

The  authors  of  these  tracts  were  supposed  to  be  a  club  of 
separatists ;  but  who  they  were  is  to  this  day  unknown.  The  most 
famous  were  those  issued  under  the  name  of  "Martin  Mar-Prelate? 
a  series  of  violent  satires  against  the  hierarchy  and  its  supporters. 

*  Punchard. 


114  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

One  was  entitled  "  THESES  MARTIANJE,  i.  e.  certain  demonstra- 
tive conclusions  set  down  and  collected  by  MARTIN  MAR-PRE- 
LATE THE  GREAT,  serving  as  a  manifest  and  sufficient  confuta- 
tion of  all  that  the  eater-caps  with  their  whole  band  of  clergy- 
priests  have,  or  can  bring,  for  the  defence  of  their  ambitious  and 
anti-christian  prelacy.  Published  by  Martin  Junior,  in  1589." 

Another  was  entitled  the  "  PROTESTATION  OF  MARTIN  MAR- 
PRELATE,  wherein,  notwithstanding  the  surprising  of  the  printer, 
he  maketh  it  known  to  the  world,  that  he  feareth  neither  proud 
priest,  anti-christian  Pope,  tyrannous  prelate,  nor  godless  eater- 
cap,  &c.,  &c.  Printed  1589." 

Another  was  "  MARTIN  MAR-PRELATE'S  APPELLATION  to  the 
high  court  of  Parliament,  from  the  bad  and  injurious  dealings  of 
the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury." 

Another  was  "  A  DIALOGUE,  wherein  is  plainly  laid  down  the 
tyrannical  dealings  of  the  lord  bishops  against  God's  children" 

Another  was  entitled  "  HA'  YE  ANY  MORE  WORK  FOR  THE 
COOPER  ;"  written  against  Dr.  Thos.  Cooper,  of  Winchester,  and 
said  to  be  printed  "  In  Europe,  not  far  from  some  of  the  bouncing 
priests,  1590." 

Another,  "  EPITOME  OF  THE  FIRST  WORK  OF  DR.  JOHN 
BRIDGES,  against  the  Puritans"  "  Oh,  read  over  Dr.  John 
Bridges,  for  it  is  a  worthy  work;  printed  over  sea,  in  Europe, 
within  two  furlongs  of  a  bouncing  priest,  at  the  cost  and  charges 
of  Martin  Mar-Prelate,  Gent." 

Another,  "  THE  COBLER'S  BOOK,  which  denies  the  Church  of 
England  to  be  a  true  Church,  and  charges  her  with  maintaining 
idolatry  under  the  name  of  decency,  in  the  habits  of  the  priests, 
baptisms  by  women,  gangdays,  saints'  eves,  bishoping  of  chil- 
dren," &c.,  &c. 

Such  titles  are  probably  a  fair  indication  of  the  works  they 
covered,  which  were  admitted  to  be  rough  and  coarse,  even  for 
that  age — far  more  inclined  to  such  a  style  of  argument  than  the 
present. 

But  the  other  side  made  no  scruple  of  resorting  to  simi- 
lar weapons.  On  the  side  of  the  bishops  appeared  one  work, 
entitled,  "  PAPPE  WITH  AN  HATCHET,"  alias  "  A  FIG  FOR  MY  GOD- 
SON ;  or  CRACK  ME  THIS  NUT;  i.  e.  a  sound-box  on  the  ear  for 
THE  IDIOT  MARTIN  to  hold  his  peace.  Written  by  one  who 
dares  call  a  dog  a  dog.  Imprinted  by  John  Anoke,  and  are  sold 
at  the  sign  of  the  Crab-tree-  Cudgel  in  Thwack-coat  lane." 

Another  on  the  same  side,  was  entitled,  "  PASQUIL'S  APOLOGY  ; 
printed  where  I  was;  and  where  I  shall  be  ready,  with  the  help 
of  God  and  my  muse,  to  send  you  a  May  game  of  Martinism. 
Anno  1593."  Another,  "  AN  ALMOND  FOR  A  PARROT,  or  an  alms 


THE  PURITANS  SUFFERING.  115 

for  Martin  Mar-Prelate,  by  CUTHBERT  CURRY-KNAVE."  Others 
of  similar  titles  were  written  in  the  same  strain. 

The  press  from  which  the  anti-prelatical  pamphlets  issued, 
was  at  length  discovered.  Some  who  had  entertained  it  were 
"  Deeply  fined  in  the  Star  Chamber ;  others  imprisoned,  and 
some  put  to  death."* 

Four  years  afterwards,  the  severities  against  the  Puritans 
having  been  continued  with  unabated  rigor,  another  attempt 
was  made  in  Parliament  to  stay  these  oppressive  cruelties.  A 
motion  was  made  for  inquiring  into  the  abuses  of  Bishops' 
Courts,  and  of  the  High  Commission  ;  by  which  subscriptions 
to  articles  were  exacted  at  the  pleasure  of  the  prelates.  The 
queen  sent  for  the  Speaker  and  demanded  the  bill.  She  said 
she  "  did  greatly  admire  at  the  presumption  of  Parliament,  for 
she  had  already  enjoined  them,  bf  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  Keeper, 
to  meddle  neither  with  matters  of  state  nor  religion."  She  charged 
the  Speaker,  on  his  allegiance,  if  any  such  bills  were  offered, 
absolutely  to  refuse  them  even  a  reading.  The  man  who  made 
the  motion  in  Parliament  wras  taken  into  custody,  stripped  of  his 
public  offices  and  employments,  incapacitated  from  any  practice 
in  his  profession  as  a  common  lawyer,  and  kept  a  prisoner  some 
years.f 

In  obedience  to  the  queen,  in  1593,  a  law  was  passed  entitled 
An  Act  to  keep  her  Majesty's  subjects  in  obedience.  By  this  act, 
any  person  above  sixteen  years,  who  obstinately  refused  for  the 
space  of  a  month  to  repair  to  some  church  or  chapel,  or  usual 
place  of  Common  Prayer;  or  who,  at  any  time,  by  writing, 
printing,  or  express  words,  should  dissuade  others  from  coming 
to  church,  or  who  should  be  present  at  any  unlawful  assembly 
or  conventicle,  under  color  of  any  pretence  or  any  exercise  of 
religion,  every  such  person  should  be  committed  to  prison  with- 
out bail  till  he  should  yield,  and  till  he  should  make  a  prescribed 
declaration  of  full  conformity.  If  any  should  not  yield  within 
three  months,  they  were  to  abjure  the  realm  and  go  into  perpetual 
banishment.  If  they  should  not  depart  from  the  realm  within 
the  time  limited  by  the  quarter  sessions  or  justices  of  peace,  or 
if  they  should  afterwards  return  without  license  from  the  queen, 
they  should  suffer  death  without  benefit  of  clergy. 

Untold  sufferings  this  act  inflicted  upon  non-conformists  in 
this  and  the  following  reigns.  Many  families  were  forced  to 
flee  into  banishment.  Some  were  put  to  death.  The  jails  and 
prisons  were  filled.  The  Puritans  were  now  greatly  increased. 
Sir  Walter  Raleigh  declared  in  Parliament,  that  there  were  not 
less  than  twenty  thousand  of  these,  divided  into  several  congre- 
gations in  Norfolk  and  Essex,  and  in  the  parts  about  London 
*Neale.  i  Hume. 


116  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

alone.  Among  the  ministers  of  these  congregations,  were  Smith, 
Jacob,  and  Ains  worth,  all  celebrated  among  the  Puritans,  and 
the  last  noted  as  among  the  most  learned  men  of  the  age. 

The  church  meeting  at  Islington  (the  same  place  where  the 
Protestant  Congregation  was  broken  up  in  Queen  Mary's  reign), 
was  discovered  by  the  bishop's  officers.  Fifty-six  of  its  mem- 
bers were  sent,  two  and  two,  to  the  jail  and  prisons  in  and  about 
London.  At  their  examination  they  confessed  that  they  had 
for  some  years  met  in  the  fields,  in  summer  time,  at  five  o'clock 
in  the  morning  of  the  Lord's  day,  and  in  the  winter  at  private 
houses :  that  they  continued  all  day  in  prayer  and  expounding 
the  Scriptures ;  "  that  they  dined  together,  and  after  dinner  made 
a  collection  for  their  diet,  and  sent  the  remainder  of  the  money 
to  their  brethren  in  prison/'  They  administered  baptism  with- 
out godfathers  or  godmothers,  and  received  the  Lord's  Supper  in 
the  same  manner  in  which  it  is  now  received  in  any  New  Eng- 
land Congregational  Church. 

The  bishops  dealing  with  these  persons  with  intolerable  seve- 
rity, they  ventured  to  lay  their  case  in  a  petition  before  the 
lords  of  the  council.  In  this  petition  they  humbly  but  firmly 
declared  the  grounds  of  their  dissent,  and  their  readiness  to  main- 
tain their  faith  and  order  from  the  Scriptures,  offering  not  only 
to  conform,  but  to  suffer  any  punishment,  if  they  should  fail  to 
justify  themselves  from  the  Word  of  God.  "  But  the  prelates 
of  this  land,"  said  they,  "  have  for  a  long  time  dealt  unlawfully 
and  outrageously  with  us,  by  the  great  power  and  high  author- 
ity they  have  gotten  into  their  hands,  and  usurped  above  all 
the  public  courts,  judges,  laws,  and  charters  of  the  land ;  per- 
secuting, imprisoning,  and  detaining  at  their  pleasure,  our  poor 
bodies,  without  any  trial,  release,  or  bail ;  some  of  us  they  have 
kept  in  close  prison  four  or  five  years  with  miserable  usage,  as 
Henry  Barrowe  and  John  Greenwood,  now  in  the  Fleet ;  others 
they  have  cast  into  Newgate,  and  laden  with  as  many  irons  as 
they  can  bear  ;  others  into  dungeons  and  loathsome  jails, — 
where  it  is  lamentable  to  relate  how  many  of  these  innocents 
have  perished  within  these  five  years ;  aged  widows,  aged  men, 
and  young  maidens  ;  where  so  many  as  the  infection  hath  spared 
be  in  woful  distress,  like  to  follow  their  fellows,  if  speedy  redress 
be  not  had."  They  related  how  they  had  been  seized,  with  vio- 
lence and  outrage,  in  the  dead  of  night ;  their  houses  broken 
open,  ransacked  and  plundered,  and  their  families  suffering  every 
abuse.  "  We  therefore  humbly  pray,"  said  they,  "  in  the  name 
of  C4od  and  our  sovereign  queen,  that  we  may  have  the  benefit 
of  the  laws,  and  the  public  charter  of  the  land  :  namely,  that  we 
may  be  received  to  bail  till  we,  by  order  of  law,  be  convicted  of 
some  crime  deserving  of  bonds.  We  plight  unto  you  our 


THE  PURITANS  SUFFERING.  117 

honors,  our  faith  unto  God,  and  our  allegiance  to  her  Majesty, 
that  we  will  not  commit  anything  unworthy  of  the  Gospel  of 
Christ,  or  to  the  disturbance  of  the  common  peace  and  good  order 
of  the  land;  and  that  we  will  be  forthcoming  at  such  reasonable 
warning  as  your  lordships  shall  command.  Oh  let  us  not  perish 
before  trial  and  judgment,  especially  imploring  and  crying  to 
you  for  the  same."* 

The  lords  of  council  dared  not  interfere.  Mr.  Smith  lay  in 
prison  twelve  months  before  he  was  called  before  the  High  Com- 
mission, and  then  he  and  the  apprehended  members  of  his 
church  were  committed  to  different  prisons,  where  "they  were 
shut  up  in  close  rooms,  not  being  allowed  the  liberty  of  the 
prison."  "  Here,"  says  Neale,  "  they  died  like  rotten  sheep,  some 
of  the  disease  of  the  prison ;  some  for  want,  and  others  of  infectious 
disorders."  "  These  bloody  men"  [the  High  Commissioners], 
says  Barrowe  in  his  supplication,  "  will  neither  allow  us  meat, 
drink,  fire,  lodging ;  nor  suffer  any  whose  heart  the  Lord  would 
stir  up  for  our  relief,  to  have  any  access  to  us  :  by  which  means 
seventeen  or  eighteen  have  perished  in  the  noisome  jails  within 
these  six  years.  Some  of  us  had  not  one  penny  when  we  were 
sent  to  prison,  nor  anything  to  procure  a  maintenance  for  our- 
selves and  families  but  our  handy-labors  and  our  trades :  by 
which  means  not  only  we,  but  our  families  and  children,  are 
undone  and  starved."  "  That  which  we  crave  for  us  all,  is  the 
liberty  to  die  openly  or  live  openly  in  the  land  of  our  nativity. 
If  we  deserve  death,  let  us  not  be  closely  murdered,  yea,  starved 
to  death,  with  hunger  and  cold,  and  stifled  in  loathsome  dun- 
geons." 

Among  those  who  perished  in  prison  was  Roger  Rippon,  who 
dying  in  Newgate,  his  fellow  prisoners  put  this  inscription  on 
his  coffin  :  "  This  is  the  CORPSE  OF  ROGER  RIPPON,  a  servant  of 
Christ,  and  her  Majesty's  faithful  subject;  who  is  the  last  of  six- 
teen or  seventeen,  which  that  great  enemy  of  God,  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  with  his  High  Commissioners,  have  mur- 
dered in  Newgate  within  these  five  years,  manifestly  for  the  tes- 
timony of  Jesus  Christ,  &c.  *  *  He  died  A.  D.  1592."  Many 
copies  of  this  inscription  were  dispersed  among  his  friends,  for 
which  some  were  apprehended  and  fined. 

The  prisoners  now  appealed  in  an  humble  petition  to  Lord 
Burleigh,  entreating  for  some  examination  before  impartial  judges. 
"  If  anything  be  found  in  us  worthy  of  death  or  of  bonds,"  said 
they,  "  let  us  be  made  an  example  to  all  posterity ;  if  not,  we  en- 
treat for  some  compassion  to  be  shown  in  equity,  according  to 
law."  Fifty-nine  persons,  from  eight  prisons  in  and  about  Lon- 
don, signed  this  petition.  But  no  relief  could  be  had.  "  Thus," 

*  Neale. 


118  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

says  Neale,  "  these  pious  and  conscientious  persons,  after  a  long 
and  illegal  imprisonment,  were  abandoned  to  the  severity  of  an 
unrighteous  law ;  some  of  them  being  publicly  executed  as 
felons,  and  others  proscribed  and  sent  into  banishment." 

Among  those  put  to  death,  were  Mr.  Barrow  e^  a  lawyer,  and 
Messrs.  Greenwood  and  Penry,  ministers  of  the  gospel.  On  the 
6th  of  May,  1693,  Barrowe  and  Greenwood  were  carried  to  Ty- 
burn, and  there  hanged  for  the  crime  of  non-conformity,  and  for 
having  written  against  the  bishops,  the  organization,  and  the 
rites  of  the  Church  of  England. 

Twenty-eight  years  after  the  landing  of  the  Pilgrims  at  Ply- 
mouth, Governor  Bradford  wrote  a  supposed  "  Dialogue  between 
some  young  men  born  in  New  England,  and  sundry  ancient 
men  that  came  out  of  Holland  and  Old  England."  In  this  dia- 
logue, the  "  ancient  men  "  cite  the  following  testimony  concern- 
ing Barrowe  and  Greenwood  :  "  First,"  say  they,  "  a  famous  and 
godly  preacher  [Phillips]  having  heard  Barrowe's  holy  speeches 
and  preparations  for  death,  said,  *  Barrowe,  my  soul  be  with 
thine.' "  "  The  same  author,"  said  the  ancient  men,  "  also  re- 
ported that  Queen  Elizabeth  asked  the  learned  Dr.  Reynolds 
what  he  thought  of  those  two  men,  Mr.  Barrowe  and  Mr.  Green- 
wood :  and  he  answered  her  Majesty,  that  it  could  not  avail  any- 
thing to  show  his  judgment  concerning  them,  seeing  they  were 
put  to  death :  and  being  loth  to  speak  further,  her  Majesty 
charged  him  upon  his  allegiance  to  speak.  Whereupon  he  an- 
swered that  he  was  persuaded,  that,  had  they  lived,  they  would 
have  been  two  as  worthy  instruments  for  the  Church  of  God,  as 
have  been  raised  up  in  this  age.  Her  Majesty  sighed  and  said 
no  more.  But  after  that,  riding  to  a  park  by  the  place  where 
they  were  executed,  and  being  willing  to  take  further  informa- 
tion concerning  them,  [she]  demanded  of  the  Right  Hon.  Earl 
of  Cumberland,  that  was  present  when  they  suffered,  what  end 
they  made.  He  answered,  A  very  godly  end,  and  prayed  for  your 
Majesty  and  State.  We  may  also  add,"  say  the  ancient  men, 
"  that  some  of  us  have  heard  by  credible  information,  that  the  queen 
demanded  of  the  archbishop,  what  he  thought  of  them  in  his  con- 
science. He  answered,  he  thought  them  the  servants  of  God, 
but  dangerous  to  the  State.  'Alas!'  said  she,  'shall  we  put  the 
servants  of  God  to  death  ?'  And  this  was  the  true  cause  why 
no  more  of  them  were  put  to  death  in  her  days."* 

But  this  conversation  came  TOO  late  to  save  Penry  from  death, 
who  was  executed  about  six  weeks  after  Barrowe  and  Green- 
wood. In  1590  a  warrant  had  been  issued  for  the  apprehension 
of  Penry  as  one  of  the  authors  of  Martin  Mar- Prelate.  Hum£ 
unhesitatingly  ascribes  the  authorship  to  him ;  but  Penry  denied 
*  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,  p.  422 


THE  PURITANS  SUFFERING.  119 

it ;  and  Martin  himself  clears  Penry  fully  from  the  charge.  Pen- 
ry  fled  into  Scotland,  where  he  remained  three  years.  Ventur- 
ing at  length  to  return  home,  he  was  seized.  A  manuscript 
was  found  in  his  possession  containing  the  heads  of  an  address 
to  the  queen,  designed  to  show  her  majesty  the  state  of  religion 
in  the  realm,  and  the  many  abuses  in  the  Church  of  England ; 
and  to  beg  of  her  the  favor  of  being  allowed  to  go  into  Wales, 
his  native  country,  and  preach  the  Gospel.  For  this  manuscript 
found  in  his  possession,  though  he  never  published  it  or  uttered 
it,  and  though  it  could  not  be  proved  that  he  intended  so  to  do, 
he  was  condemned  to  die. 

Penry  protested  against  this  injustice.  "  The  case  is  most 
lamentable,"  said  he,  "  that  the  private  observations  of  any  stu- 
dent, being  in  a  foreign  land,  and  wishing  well  to  his  prince  and 
country,  should  bring  his  life  with  blood  to  a  violent  end :  espe- 
cially seeing  they  are  most  private,  and  so  imperfect,  that  they 
have  no  coherence  at  all  in  them."  He  declared  that  he  had  not 
so  much  as  looked  into  them  for  14  or  15  months.  "  And,"  said 
he,  "  I  thank  the  Lord,  I  remember  not  that  that  day  hath  passed 
over  my  head  since  under  her  government  I  came  to  the  know- 
ledge of  the  truth,  wherein  I  have  not  commended  her  estate 
unto  God."  "  I  am,"  said  he,  "  a  poor  young  man,  born  and 
bred  in  the  mountains  of  Wales.  I  am  the  first,  since  the  last 
springing  of  the  gospel  in  this  latter  age,  that  publicly  labored  to 
have  the  blessed  seed  thereof  sown  in  those  barren  mountains. 
I  have  often  rejoiced  before  my  God,  as  He  knoweth,  that  I  had 
the  favor  to  be  born  and  live  under  her  majesty  for  promoting 
this  work.  And  now  being  to  end  my  days  before  I  am  jcome 
to  the  one-half  of  my  years  in  the  likely  course  of  nature,  I  leave 
the  success  of  labors  unto  such  of  my  countrymen  as  the  Lord 
is  to  raise  after  me."  *  *  *  *  "  An  enemy  unto  any  good 
order  and  policy  I  was  never.  Whatsoever  I  wrote  in  religion, 
the  same  did  I  simply  for  no  other  end  than  the  bringing  of 
God's  truth  to  light.  I  never  did  anything  in  this  cause  (Lord, 
thou  art  witness)  for  contention,  vain  glory,  or  to  draw  disciples 
after  me.  Whatsoever  I  wrote  or  held  besides  the  warrant  of 
the  written  word,  I  have  always  warned  all  men  to  leave."  *  * 
"  Far  be  it,  that  either  the  thought  of  saving  an  earthly  life,  the 
regard  which  in  nature  I  ought  to  have  to  the  desolate  outward 
state  of  a  poor  friendless  widow  and  four  fatherless  infants  *  * 
or  to  any  other  outward  thing,  should  enforce  me,  by  the 
denial  of  God's  truth,  contrary  to  my  conscience,  to  lose  my 
own  soul.  *  *  I  do  from  my  heart  forgive  all  that  seek 

my  life,  as  I  desire  to  be  forgiven  in  the  day  of  strict  account; 
praying  for  them  as  for  my  own  soul,  that  although  upon  earth 
we  cannot  accord,  we  may  yet  meet  in  heaven,  unto  our  eternal 


120  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

comfort  and  unity  ;  where  controversies  shall  be  at  an  end. 

*  *     Subscribed  with  the  heart  and  the  hand  which  never  de- 
vised or  wrote  anything  to  the  discredit  or  defamation  of  Queen 
Elizabeth :  I  take  it  on  my  death,  as  I  hope  to  have  life  after 
this. 

"  JOHN  PENRY." 

The  archbishop  was  the  first  to  sign  his  death-warrant.  It 
was  sent  to  the  sheriff,  who  the  very  same  day  erected  a 
gallows,  and  sent  his  officers  to  bid  the  condemned  man  to  be 
ready,  for  he  must  die  that  afternoon.  Thus,  on  the  29th  of 
May,  1593,  died  John  Penry,  in  the  34th  year  of  his  age. 

It  will  serve  to  show  the  spirit  of  these  martyrs,  as  well  as  to 
bring  home  to  our  own  bosoms  the  sufferings  of  these  men 
whose  firmness  bequeathed  us  our  liberties,  to  give  here  a 
part  of  the  letter  which  Penry  wrote  to  his  fellow  sufferers  just 
before  his  death. 
"  To  the  distressed,  faithful  congregation  of  Christ  in  London ; 

and  all  the  members  thereof,  whether  in  bonds  or  at  liberty. 

"  MY  BELOVED    BRETHREN, 

"MR.  F.  JOHNSON,  &c.,  &c.,  with  the  rest  of  you  both  men  and 
women,  as  if  I  particularly  warned  you  all,  which  stand  mem- 
bers of  this  poor  afflicted  congregation,  whether  at  liberty  or 
in  bonds ;  Jesus  Christ  the  Great  King  and  Prince  of  the 
kings  of  the  earth,  bless  you  and  comfort  you  *  *  *.  Beloved, 
let  us  think  our  lot  and  portion  more  than  blessed,  that  now  we 
are  vouchsafed  the  favor  not  only  to  know  and  profess,  but  also 
to  suffer  for  the  sincerity  of  the  gospel ;  and  let  us  remember 
that  great  is  our  reward  in  heaven,  if  we  endure  unto  the  end. 

*  *  *     I  testify  unto  you  for  mine  own  part,  as  I  shall  answer 
it  before  Jesus  Christ  and  his  elect  angels,  that  I  never  saw  any 
truth  more  clear  and  undoubted,  than  this  witness  wherein  we 
stand.     *  *  *     And  I  thank  my  God  I  am  not  only  ready  to  be 
bound  and  banished,  but  even  to  die  in  this  cause  by  his  strength ; 
yea,  my  brethren,  I  greatly  long,  in  regard  of  myself,  to  be  dis- 
solved, and  to  live  in  the  blessed  kingdom  of  heaven,  with  Jesus 
Christ,  and  his  angels  *  *  *  with  the  rest  of  the  glorious  kings 
and  prophets,  and  martyrs  and  witnesses  of  Jesus  Christ,  that 
have  been  from  the  beginning  of  the  world ;  particularly  with 
my  two  brethren,  Mr.  Henry  Barrowe  and  Mr.  John  Greenwood, 
who  have  last  of  all  yielded  their  blood  for  this  precious  testimo- 
ny ;  confessing  unto  you,  my  brethren  and  sisters,  that  if  I  might 
live  upon  the  earth  the  days  of  Methuselah  twice  told,  and  that 
in  no  less  comfort  than  Peter,  James  and  John  were,  in  the  mount, 
and  after  this  life  might  be  sure  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  that 
yet  to  gain  all  this,  I  durst  not  go  from  my  former  testimony. 


THE  PURITANS  SUFFERING.  121 

*  *  *     Strive  for  me,  and  with  me,  that  the  Lord  our  God  may 
make  me  and  all  able  to  end  our  course  with  joy  and  patience. 
Strive  also  that  he  may  stay  his  blessed  hand,  if  it  be  his  good 
pleasure,  and  not  make  any  further  breach  in  his  Church,  by  the 
taking  away  any  more  of  us  as  yet,  to  the  discouragement  of  the 
weak,  and  the  lifting  up  of  the  horn  of  our  adversaries.     *  *  * 
I  would  indeed,  if  it  be  his  good  pleasure,  live  yet  with  you  to 
help  you  bear  that  grievous  and  hard  yoke,  which  ye  are  like  to 
sustain,  either  here  or  in  a  strange  land.     And,  my  good  brethren, 
seeing  banishment  with  loss  of  goods  is  likely  to  betide  you  all, 
prepare  yourselves  for  this  hard  entreaty,  and  rejoice  that  any 
are  made  worthy  for  Christ's  cause  to  suffer  and  bear  all  these 
things.     Arid  I  beseech  you  in  the  bowels  of  Jesus  Christ,  that 
none  of  you  in  this  case  look  upon  his  particular  estate,  but 
regard  the  general  state  of  the  Church  of  God ;  that  the  same 
may  go  and  be  kept  together,  whithersoever  it  shall  please  God 
to  send  you.     Oh  the  blessing  will  be  great  that  shall  ensue  this 
care  ;  whereas,  if  you  go   every  man   to  provide  for  his   own 
house,  and  to  look  for  his  own  family  first,  neglecting  poor  Zion, 
the  Lord  will  set  his  face  against  you,  and  scatter  you  from  one 
end  of  heaven  to  the  other.     *  *  *     The  Lord,  my  brethren  and 
sisters,  hath  not  forgotten  to  be  gracious  unto  Zion.     You  shall 
yet  find  days  of  peace  and  rest,  if  you  continue  faithful.     This 
stamping  and  treading  us  under  his  feet,  this  subverting  of  our 
cause  and  right  in  judgment,  is  done  by  Him,  to  the  end  that  we 
should  search  and  try  our  ways.     *  *  *     Let  not  those   of  you 
that  either  have  stocks  in  your  hands,  or  some  likely  trades  to 
live  by,  dispose  of  yourselves  where  it  may  be  most  commodious 
for  your  outward  estate,  and  in  the  mean  time  suffer  the  poor 
ones  that  have  no  such  means  either  to  bear  the  whole  work  upon 
their  weak  shoulders,  or  to  end  their  days  in  sorrow  and  mourn- 
ing, for  want  of  outward  and  inward  comforts  in  the  land  of 
strangers  ;  for  the  Lord  will  be  the  avenger  of  all  such  dealings 
*.     Let  not  the  poor  and  friendless  be  forced  to  stay  behind 
here,  and  to  break  a  good  conscience  for  want  of  your  support 
and  kindness  to  them,  that  they  may  go  with  you.     And  here  I 
humbly  beseech   you,  not  in  any  outward   regard,  as  I  shall 
answer  it  before  my  God,  that  you  would  take  my  poor  and 
desolate  widow,  and  mess  of  fatherless  and  friendless  orphans 
with  you  into  exile,  whithersoever  you  go  ;  and  you  shall  find, 
I  doubt  not,  that  the  blessed  promises  of  my  God  made  unto  me 
and  mine,  will  accompany  them.     *  *  *  *     Only  I  beseech  you, 
let  them  not  continue  after  you  in  this  land,  where  they  must  be 
forced  to  go  again  into  Egypt.     *  *  *     Be  kind  and  loving  and 
tender-hearted,  the  one  of  you  towards  the  other.     Labor  every 
way  to  increase  love,  and  to  show  the  duties  of  love,  one  of  you 


122  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

toward  another,  by  visiting  and  comforting  and  relieving  one  the 
other.  Be  watching  in  prayer ;  especially  remember  those  of 
our  brethren  who  are  especially  endangered  *  *  *.  I  fear  me 
our  carelessness  was  over  great  unto  our  God  for  the  lives  of  those 
two  so  notable  lights  of  his  Church,  who  no  wrest  with  him  ;  and 
that  thus  he  took  them  away,  for  many  respects,  seeming  good 
to  his  wisdom ;  so  also,  that  we  might  learn  to  be  more  careful 
in  prayer  in  all  such  causes.  Pray,  then,  *  *  *  brethren,  for 
brother  Mr.  Francis  Johnson  and  for  me,  *  *  that  God  may 
spare  us  unto  his  Church,  if  it  be  his  good  pleasure  ;  or  give  us 
exceeding  faithfulness  ;  and  be  every  way  comfortable  unto  the 
sister  and  wife  of  the  dead  :  I  mean  unto  my  beloved  Mrs.  Bar- 
rowe,  and  Mrs.  Greenwood,  whom  I  heartily  salute,  and  desire 
to  be  much  comforted  in  their  God,  who,  by  his  blessings  from 
above,  will  countervail  unto  them  the  want  of  so  notable  a  bro- 
ther and  a  husband.  I  would  wish  you  earnestly  to  write,  yea, 
to  send  if  you  may,  to  comfort  the  brethren  in  the  West  and 
North,  that  they  faint  not  in  these  troubles ;  and  that  you  also 
may  have  of  their  advice  and  they  of  yours,  what  to  do  in  these 
desolate  times.  I  would  wish  you  and  them  to  be 

together  if  you  may,  whithersoever  you  shall  be  banished; 
and  to  this  purpose  bethink  you  beforehand,  where  to  be, 
and  be  all  of  you  assured,  that  he  who  is  your  God  in 
England,  will  be  your  God  in  any  land  under  the  whole 
heaven;  for  the  earth  and  the  fullness  thereof  are  his;  and 
blessed  are  they  that  for  his  cause  are  bereaved  of  any  part  of 
the  same.  Finally,  my  brethren,  the  Eternal  God  bless  you  and 
yours,  that  I  may  meet  you  all  unto  my  comfort  in  the  blessed 
kingdom  of  heaven.  Thus  having  from  my  heart,  and  with 
tears,  performed,  it  may  be,  my  last  duty  towards  you  in  this  life, 
I  salute  you  all  in  the  Lord,  both  men  and  women,  even  those 
whom  I  have  not  mentioned,  for  all  your  names  I  know  not. 
And  remember  to  stand  fast  in  Jesus  Christ,  as  you  have  received 
him  unto  immortality  ;  and  may  he  confirm  and  establish  you 
unto  the  end  for  the  praise  of  his  glory.  Arnen.  Your  loving 
brother  in  the  patience  and  sufferings  of  the  Gospel. 

"  JOHN  PENRY. 
«  24th  4th  mo.,  April,  1503." 

This  was  the  last  work  of  Penry ;  to  give  a  word  of  en- 
couragement and  comfort  to  his  brethren  who  were  now  about 
to  be  driven  into  that  exile  from  which  our  pilgrim  fathers  came, 
to  give  us,  their  children,  our  pleasant  homes  in  this  western 
world.  Others  have  labored,  and  we  have  entered  into  their 
labors.  How  does  it  become  the  descendants  of  such  ancestors 
never  to  throw  away  the  principles  which  they  prized  so  dear, 


THE    PURITANS    SUFFERING.  123 

till  at  least  we  are  satisfied  that  they  are  neither  the  principles  of 
national  freedom  nor  of  the  Word  of  God.  An  age  of  suffer- 
ings is  yet  before  us,  before  we  come  to  the  voyage  of  the 
Pilgrim  Fathers.  But  upon  the  details  of  sufferings  we  shall 
dwell  no  more  than  is  necessary  to  give  the  most  rapid  intelligi- 
ble account  of  the  history.  We  now  take  our  leave  of  the  his- 
tory down  to  the  death  of  Queen  Elizabeth  in  1603,  a'nd  shall 
employ  the  next  chapter  upon  the  great  work  of  the  "  Judicious 
Hooker"  a  work  written  expressly  against  the  Puritans  by  the 
master  mind  of  the  established  Church  in  that  age ;  and  which 
was  not  only  relied  upon  by  the  persecuting  hierarchy  of  the 
succeeding  reigns  as  an  ample  and  triumphant  justification  of 
all  their  cruelties,  but  which  has  stood  the  great  text  book  of 
those  who  hate  the  principles  of  the  Puritans  down  to  the  pre- 
sent day. 


IX. 


«  THE  JUDICIOUS  HOOKER." 

The  design  and  principles  of  his  Ecclesiastical  Polity.  Its  controlling  in- 
fluence over  the  dynasty  of  the  Stuarts.  These  principles  examined. 
His  doctrine.  His  notion  of  the  power  of  orders. 

THE  disputes  which  began/  about  vestments  and  ceremonies  in- 
volved deep  principles  concerning  the  rights  of  conscience.  The 
reign  of  Elizabeth  had  not  expired  before  the  debate  left  the  form 
of  questions  concerning  particular  grievances,  and  assumed  a 
shape  corresponding  with  the  reality — not  a  question  about  sur- 
plices, caps,  and  ceremonies,  but  a  deep  and  solemn  inquiry  into 
the  ground,  nature,  and  limits  of  ecclesiastical  power ;  and  the 
rights  of  conscience  in  congregations  of  Christians,  and  in  indi^ 
vidual  men. 

Accordingly,  when  Richard  Hooker,  in  the  latter  part  of 
Elizabeth's  reign,  took  up  his  pen  against  the  Puritans  in  justifi- 
cation of  the  severities  practised  by  the  queen,  the  bishops,  and 
the  High  Commission,  he  spent  not  his  strength  upon  the  par- 
ticular impositions  of  kneeling  at  the  sacrament,  the  surplice,  the 
sign  of  the  cross  in  baptism,  and  things  of  that  sort,  but  laid  down 
the  broad  PRINCIPLE  that  the  CHURCH  has  authority  to  impose  such 
things  according'  to  her  discretion ;  and  that  the  conscience  of  in- 
dividuals and  of  particular  congregations  in  such  matters  is  not  to 
be  regarded;  but  that  they  maybe  rightly  and  piously  COMPELLED 
to  yield,  by  whatever  PENALTIES  good  mother  Church  and  the 
sovereign  prince  may  find  it  necessary  to  employ  for  the  attain' 
ment  of  that  end. 

Richard  Hooker  was  sufficiently  "judicious"  to  perceive  that 
on  no  principle  short  of  this,  could  the  rigors  of  the  established 
Church  be  justified,  or  the  CnuRch  itself,  as  established  in 
England,  be  vindicated,  and  that  if  this  principle  could  be  sub- 
stantiated, the  robes,  ceremonies  and  liturgies  were  all  right ; 
and  the  fines,  the  imprisonments,  the  banishments,  and  the 
slaughters  inflicted,  were  all  proper,  just,  and  wholesome  pun- 
ishments for  the  coercion  of  the  wickedly  rebellious. 

Accordingly,  the  account  which  Hooker  himself  gives  of  his  great 
work  on  Ecclesiastical  Polity,  is,  that  his  design  was  "  To  write 


"  THE    JUDICIOUS    HOOKER."  125 

a  deliberate  and  sober  Treatise  on  the  CHURCH'S  POWER,  to  make 
canons  for  the  use  of  ceremonies,  and  BY  LAW  TO  IMPOSE 
AN  OBEDIENCE  to  them,  as  upon  her  children,  and  this  he 
proposed  to  do  in  eight  books  of  the  LAWS  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL 
POLITY."  * 

This  was  cutting  up  the  whole  matter  by  the  roots.  Grant 
this  principle  and  there  is  no  further  dispute  about  surplices, 
liturgies,  and  ceremonies;  the  Church  may  stand  upon  her 
authority.  There  are  no  rights  of  conscience  in  the  case  ;  and 
if  any  begin  to  prate  about  conscience,  or  hesitate  to  yield  a  due 
conformity,  they  may  be  righteously  silenced,  imprisoned,  banish- 
ed, hanged,  or  burnt.  A  most  convenient  doctrine,  no  doubt,  for 
the  prelates  and  the  despotic  queen,  in  her  capacity  of  head  of 
the  Church! 

This  was  the  great  design  and  principle  of  Hooker,  which 
he  maintained  with  consummate  ability,  in  a  work  on  which  he 
employed  his  undivided  energies  for  a  series  of  years.  Many 
of  his  subordinate  principles,  illustrations,  and  arguments,  are 
admirable ;  and  could  they  be  separated  from  this  great  design, 
they  would  be  most  excellent.  Much  truth  is  mingled  with  his 
scheme  (when  was  any  monstrous  error  ever  put  forth,  entirely 
dissociated  from  all  truth,  and  in  its  own  naked  deformity  ?),  but 
that  has  only  served  to  make  the  lurking  mischief  the  more  de- 
ceptive and  dangerous. 

This  great  doctrine  of  Hooker,  and  the  ability  with  which  he 
maintained  it,  have  made  him  the  great  champion  of  the  Church 
of  England,  from  that  day  to  this.  He  became,  in  his  day,  the 
beloved  of  Archbishop  Whitgift ;  the  honored  of  Queen  Eliza- 
beth ;  and  when  King  James  came  from  Scotland  to  take  pos- 
session of  the  English  throne,  almost  the  first  thing  he  did,  was 
to  inquire  of  the  Archbishop  for  "  his  friend  Mr.  Hooker,  that 
writ  the  works  of  Ecclesiastical  Polity,"  and  he  expressed  great 
sorrow,  when  he  learned  that  Hooker  died  the  year  before. 
King  James,  when  among  the  Presbyterians  in  Scotland,  had 
often  and  earnestly  professed  himself,  from  entire  conviction,  a 
Presbyterian.  His  accession  to  the  throne  of  England  wrought 
a  marvellous  change  in  his  opinions.  "  No  Bishop,  no  King," 
became  now  his  favorite  saying ;  and  he  affirmed  that  "  Presby- 
tery agreed  with  monarchy,  as  well  as  God  with  devil."  The 
work  of  Hooker  was  precisely  to  his  mind.  It  maintained  his 
lofty  notions  of  Church  prerogative ;  or  rather  of  his  own  pre- 
rogative as  head  of  the  Church.  It  was  indeed  as  thorough- 
going a  defence  of  despotism  as  could  be  desired.  It  is  no 
wonder  that  King  James  (as  Hooker's  biographer  says)  did 
never  mention  him  but  with  the  epithet  of  "  The  learned,"  or  "  ju- 

*  Life,  p.  58,  vol.  i.,  Ed.  Lond.,  1825. 


126  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

DICIOUS,"  or  "  Reverend,"  or  "  Venerable  Mr.  Hooker."  "  Nor 
did  his  son,  our  late  King  Charles  L,  ever  mention  him,  but  with 
the  same  reverence ;  enjoining  his  son  our  own  gracious  king 
[Charles  II.]  to  be  studious  in  Mr.  Hooker's  book"  The  Bishop 
of  Exeter,  in  his  epistle  dedicatory  of  an  edition  of  Hooker,  ad- 
dressed to  King  Charles  II.,  says,  that  the  king  "needs  nothing 
more  to  commend  the  work  to  his  majesty's  acceptance,  than  the 
commendation  it  had  from  his  royal  father ;  who,  a  few  days 
before  he  was  crowned  with  martyrdom,  recommended  to  his 
dearest  children,  the  study  of  Mr.  Hooker's  Ecclesiastical  Polity, 
even  next  to  the  Bible" 

It  was  here  that  these  infatuated  scions  of  an  infatuated  fami- 
ly drank  in  those  lessons  of  despotism,  and  that  contempt  for 
the  rights  of  conscience,  which,  under  James  L,  drove  away  our 
Pilgrim  Fathers ;  brought  his  son  Charles  I.  to  the  block ;  led 
on  Charles  II.  in  his  iniquitous  attempt  to  force  Episcopacy  upon 
the  Presbyterians  of  Scotland ;  and  which  lost  James  II.  and 
his  heirs  the  kingdom. 

That  these  four  successive  kings  of  the  house  of -Stuart  might 
have  been  so  infatuated  as  to  intrench  so  presumptuously  upon 
the  liberties  of  their  people,  even  if  Hooker  had  never  written, — 
is  possible.  But  it  is  more  probable  that  the  principles  and  rea- 
sonings of  Hooker  ripened  the  principles  of  despotism  in  these 
kings;  gave  conscience  and  boldness  to  their  endeavors;  and 
were  thus  the  remoter  but  actual  causes  of  the  calamities  that 
overwhelmed  the  dynasty  of  the  Stuarts.  I  see  little  cause  to 
doubt,  that  if  the  judicious  Hooker  had*  never  lived,  America 
would  not  have  been  settled  by  the  Pilgrims  ;  Charles  I.  would 
not  have  been  beheaded ;  Scotland  would  have  been  saved  the 
burnings  and  butcheries  of  the  Episcopal  war ;  and  James  II. 
would  not  have  been  driven  from  his  throne. 

It  seems  proper,  therefore,  in  our  survey  of  the  history  of  those 
times,  to  pay  some  particular  attention  to  a  work,  otherwise  so 
famous,  and  which  was  productive  of  so  great  results  both  in  the 
religious  and  the  political  world. 

The  design  of  Hooker,  then,  was,  as  has  been  stated,  "  To  write 
a  deliberate  and  sober  treatise  on  the  Church's  power ;  to  make 
Canons  for  the  use  of  Ceremonies ;  and  by  law  to  impose  an  obe- 
dience to  them  as  upon  her  children" 

The  "  Canons  for  the  use  of  ceremonies,"  which  Hooker  main- 
tained the  Church's  power  to  make  and  impose  b'y  law,  were  the 
imposition  of  a  Liturgy,  vestments,  and  the  cross  in  baptism, 
kneeling  at  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  all  other 
forms  and  rituals  which  the  Church  had,  from  time  to  time,  de- 
vised and  ordained. 

He  rejects  entirely  the  idea  that  tbe  Scripture  is  the  sole  or 


"THE  JUDICIOUS  HOOKER."  127 

a  sufficient  guide  in  matters  of  Church  order  and  polity ;  arid  freely 
admits  that  the  things  for  which  the  Church  of  England  was 
persecuting  the  Puritans  to  death,  are  not  required  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  have  no  pattern  there. 

"  To  devise  any  certain  form  for  the  outward  administration  of 
public  duties  in  the  service  of  God  or  things  belonging  thereto," 
says  Hooker,*  "  and  to  find  out  the  most  convenient  for  that  use,  is 
A  POINT  OF  WISDOM  ECCLESIASTICAL.  It  is  not  for  a  man,which  doth 
know,  or  should  know,  what  Order  is,  and  what  peaceable  gov- 
ernment requireth,  to  ask,  "  Why  should  we  hang-  our  judgment  on 
the  Church's  sleeve  ?"  and  "  Why  in  matters  of  order,  more  .than 
in  matters  of  doctrine,  The  CHURCH  HATH  AUTHORITY  to  es- 
tablish that  for  our  order  at  one  time,  which  at  another  time  it  may 
abolish,  and  in  both  it  may  do  ivell  *  *  *  Laivs  touching'  matters 
of  Order  are  CHANGEABLE  BY  THE  POWER  OF  THE  CHURCH  ;  arti- 
cles concerning  doctrine  are  not  so."  ."The  Church,  being  a 
body  which  dieth  not,  hath  always  power,  as  occasion  requireth, 
no  less  to  ordain  that  which  never  was,  than  to  ratify  what  hath 
been  before."* 

If  this  principle  is  correct,  then  the  rituals  of  popery  were  all 
right ;  having  been  ordained  by  what  churchmen  acknowledge 
the  true  Catholic  Church,  and  having  never  been  changed  by  the 
same.  On  this  principle,  the  Church  of  England,  as  well  as  all 
reformed  Churches,  was  purely  schismatic  and  rebellious  ;  and 
the  Puseyites  are  only  following  out  this  principle  of  Hooker, 
when  they  declare  that  they  "  Hate  the  Reformation  more  and 
more" 

But  if  by  "  The  Church"  Hooker  means  not  any  Catholic 
organization,  polity,  or  authority ;  but  a  mere  national  or  provin- 
cial organization  ;  or  the  body  of  Christians  in  any  particular 
land,  that  has  power  in  its  "  Wisdom  Ecclesiastical,"  to  ordain  or 
alter  for  that  particular  land;  then  the  Episcopal  Church  in  New 
England  is  purely  schismatic ;  the  Puritans,  on  Hooker's  princi- 
ple, having  as  clear  a  divine  right  to  ordain  rites  and  ceremonies 
for  worship,  and  to  fix  the  shape  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Polity 
within  their  domains,  according  to  their  "  wisdom  ecclesiastical," 
as  the  Church  of  England  has  to  do  the  same  in  England,  or 
the  pope  to  do  the  same  at  Rome,  or  the  Patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople within  the  limits  of  the  Greek  religion. 

Indeed  [on  p.  422]  Hooker  himself  seems  to  draw  this  conclu- 
sion. He  says,  "  That  which  the  Church  by  her  ecclesiastical 
authority  shall  probably  think  and  define  to  be  TRUE  or  GOOD, 
must,  in  congruity  of  reason,  OVERRULE  all  other  inferior  judg- 
ments whatsoever."  *  *  "  The  bare  consent  of  the  whole  Church 

*  Page  421.  t  Vol.  i.,  p.  220. 


128  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES.     . 

should  of  itself  STOP  THEIR  MOUTHS,  who,  living"  under  it,  dare  to 
bark  against  it" 

On  this  principle,  the  Reformation  was  a  rebellious  schism. 
Luther  was  only  barking  at  what  should  have  stopped  his  mouth. 
The  Church  had  not  only  consented;  it  had  thought  and  defined ; 
and  done  so  "probably"  i.  e.  with  probable  correctness ;  probable, 
in  view  of  the  Church  itself:  for  why  should  infallibility  be 
mistaken  ?  On  this  principle  of  Hooker,  the  Decrees  of  the 
Council  of  Trent  must  be  regarded  as  "  true  and  good :"  a  suffi- 
cient law  to  bind  the  conscience  of  every  one,  who,  by  birth  or 
habitation,  falls  within  the  local  domains  of  the  Papal  Church 

But  Hooker  thinks  it  a  matter  of  common  sense  that  the 
Church  should  necessarily  have  this  authority.  "  Might  we  not" 
(he  goes  on  to  say)  "  think  it  more  than  wonderful,  that  nature 
should  in  all  communities  appoint  a  predominant  judgment  to 
sway  and  overrule  in  so  many  things ;  or  that  God  himself 
should  allow  so  much  authority  and  power  unto  every  poor  fam- 
ily *  *  *  anc[  that  the  city  of  the  living  God,  which  is  his  Church, 
be  able  neither  to  command,  nor  yet  to  forbid  anything  which  the 
meanest  shall  in  that  respect,  and  for  her  SOLE  AUTHORITY'S  SAKE, 
be  bound  to  obey  ?"  *  *  *  "  Surely  the  Church  of  God  in  this 
business,  is  neither  of  capacity,  I  trust,  so  weak,  nor  so  unstrength- 
ened,  I  know,  with  authority  from  above,  but  that  her  laws  may 
EXACT  OBEDIENCE,  at  the  hand  of  her  own  children  ;  and  enjoin 
gainsayers  silence,  giving  them  roundly  to  understand,  that,  where 
our  duty  is,  submission,  weak  opposition  betokens  pride." 

And  by  this  authority  to  command  or  forbid,  Hooker  would 
seem  to  think  it  suitable  for  the  Church  to  "  command  to  abstain 
from  meats,"  in  Lent ;  or  to  forbid  to  eat  the  same  on  Fridays; 
if  the  Church,  in  her  Wisdom  Ecclesiastical,  should  think  fit  so 
to  do.  "  Now,"  he  says  (p.  225),  "  as  we  live  in  civil  society, 
the  state  of  the  commonwealth  wTherein  we  live,  both  may  and 
doth  require  certain  laws  concerning  food.  *  *  Yea, 

the  self-same  matter  is  also  a  subject  wherein  some  true  Ecclesi- 
astical Laws  have  place,  *  *  *  our  private  discretion,  which 
otherwise  might  guide  us  a  contrary  way,  must  here  submit 
itself.  *  *  *  In  which  case,  that  of  Zonaras  concerning  fasts 
may  be  remembered  :  *  Fastings  are  good,  but  let  good  things  be 
done  in  good  and  decent  manner.  He  that  transgresseth  in  his 
fastings  the  orders  of  the  Holy  Fathers,  the  positive  laws  of  the 
Church  of  Christ,  must  be  plainly,  told,  that  good  things  do  lose 
the  grace  of  their  goodness  when  in  good  sort  they  are  not  per- 
formed.' And  *  here  men's  private  fancies  must  give  place  to 
the  higher  judgment  of  the  Church,  which  is  in  authority  a  mother 
over  them" 

And  Hooker  not  only  claims  for  the  Church  the  divine  right  of 


"  THE    JUDICIOUS    HOOKER."  129 

commanding  and  forbidding  things  not  commanded  or  forbidden 
in  Scripture,  but  he  claims  a  sort  of  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
by  which  the  Church  is  guided  in  making  these  canons.  On  this 
ground  he  puts  the  canons  and  traditions  of  the  Church  on  a  very 
near  equality  with  the  express  injunctions  of  the  Word  of  God : 
claiming  for  these  traditions  and  canons  the  same  authority  over 
the  consciences  of  men.  "  There  is  no  impediment,"  he  says 
(p.  304),  "  but  that  the  self-same  SPIRIT,  which  revealeth  the  things 
that  God  hath  set  down  in  his  law,  may  also  be  thought  to  aid  and 
direct  men  in  finding  out  by  the  light  of  reason  what  laws  are  ex- 
pedient to  be  made  for  the  guiding  of  his  Church,  OVER  AND  BESIDES 
THEM  THAT  ARE  IN  SCRIPTURE,  *  *  and  for  that  cause  it  is 
not  said  amiss,  touching  Ecclesiastical  Canons,  That  by  INSTINCT 
OF  THE  HOLY  GHOST  they  have  been  made  and  consecrated  by  the 
reverend  acceptation  of  the  worW 

Here  then  is  ecclesiastical  tradition  and  usurpation  claiming 
for  itself  equal  authority  with  the  Word  of  God !  By  what  rule 
Hooker  could  reject  the  canons  "  forbidding  to  marry,"  and  com- 
manding to  abstain  from  meat,  or  enjoining  "  auricular  confes- 
sion," or  anything  else  which  the  Church  of  Rome  has  estab- 
lished, does  not  appear.  Sure!}7,  for  some  dark  ages,  these  had 
been  consecrated  by  the  Reverend  acceptation  of  the  world  f  and 
as  to  the  "  instinct  of  the  Holy  Ghost "  for  the  making  of  canons, 
why  should  not  that  reside  at  Rome  as  well  as  at  Canterbury  ? — at 
Canterbury  under  the  Popes,  as  well  as  at  Canterbury  under  the 
Prelates  ? — at  the  Council  of  Trent  as  well  as  in  the  palace  at 
Lambeth  ? 

But  it  is  time  to  inquire  what  is  the  Church  to  which  Hooker 
attributes  this  authority  ?  Is  it  each  particular  congregation 
of  faithful  men,  acting  for  themselves  alone  ?  By  no  means  ;  on 
his  system  such  congregations  have  no  rights  in  the  case,  save 
to  submit  to  higher  authority.  His  notion  of  the  potential 
Church,  is  not  of  a  Church,  but  of  the  Church  holy  and  catholic. 
Yet  even  here  Hooker  is  confused ;  sometimes  he  attributes 
these  awful  powers  to  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  having  catholic 
authority,  and  yet  an  ideal  polity  ;  a  catholic  authority  without  a 
catholic  organization,  speaking  by  no  authorized  agents,  and  with 
no  authorized  tellers  to  declare  her  suffrages  ;  for  he  does  not 
allow  her  to  speak  with  final  authority  either  by  councils  or 
by  popes.  Sometimes  he  vests  this  divine  power  in  such  an 
unorganized,  undefined,  impalpable  catholic  authority,  a  mere 
figment,  a  nonentity  ;  and  sometimes  his  idea  of  mother  Church 
is  that  of  the  supreme  ecclesiastical  power  in  a  given  territory. 
In  neither  case  does  he  allow  any  share  of  authority  to  the  com- 
mon people,  but  reposes  all  power  in  the  hands  of  the  clergy 
alone.  "Hereupon,"  he  says  (i.,p.  333),  "  we  hold  that  GOD'S 


130  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

CLERGY  are  A  STATE,  *  *  *  a  state  whereunto  the  rest  of 
God's  people  must  BE  SUBJECT,  as  touching  things  that  appertain 
to  their  souls'  health." 

But  what  if  this  clergy  in  any  land  are  ignorant  or  idolatrous  ? 
What  if  they  are  all  sunk  to  the  lowest  abominations  of  popery  ? 
Must  the  rest  of  God's  people  continue  subject  in  that  case  ? 
Must  we  follow  the  blind,  and  antichristian,  and  idolatrous,  be- 
cause they  claim  to  be  God's  clergy  ?  Surely  Hooker  allows 
popish  clergy  and  prelates  as  righteous  an  authority  as  any  other. 
On  this  point  he  says  expressly  (p.  334),  "  It  is  with  the  clergy, 
if  their  persons  be  respected,  even  as  it  is  with  other  men  ;  their 
quality  many  times  far  beneath  that  which  the  dignity  of  their 
place  requireth.  Howbeit,  according  to  order  of  polity,  they 
being  the  light  of  the  world,  others,  though  wiser  and  better,  must 
that  way  be  subject  to  them" 

But  the  clergy,  being  a  state,  require,  on  Hooker's  scheme,  a 
"  polity"  over  them.  "  Again,  for  as  much  as  where  the  clergy 
are  any  great  multitudes,  order  doth  necessarily  require  that,  by 
degrees,  they  be  distinguished  ;  we  hold  that  there  have  ever  been, 
and  ever  ought  to  be,  in  such  case,  at  least,  TWO  sorts  of  ecclesi- 
astical persons,  the  one  subordinate  unto  the  other."  Hooker 
here  shows  himself  really  judicious  in  putting  in  a  claim  for  no 
more  than  "  TWO  sorts."  But  it  is  wonderful  that  Hooker  did 
not  carry  out  his  principle  to  its  legitimate  conclusions ;  why  he 
did  not  make  archbishops  above  diocesan  bishops,  patriarchs 
above  these,  and  then  crown  the  apex  with  a  pope.  The  princi- 
ple of  Hooker  is  unfortunately  different  from  that  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  with  regard  to  what  "order  doth  require"  among 
his  ministers.  Two  of  the  twelve  disciples  once  desired  to  be 
above  their  brethren  by  such  "  degrees ;"  and  when  the  ten  heard 
it,  they  were  filled  with  indignation.  Then  our  Lord  took  oc- 
casion to  settle  the  question  of  "  degrees"  among  his  ministers. 
"  Ye  know  that  the  princes  of  the  Gentiles  exercise  dominion 
over  them,  and  they  that  are  great  exercise  authority  among 
them,  but  it  shall  not  be  so  among  you" 

This  prelatical  domination  being  established  as  the  polity  of 
Christ's  Church,  Hooker  would  leave  nothing  for  the  people  and 
the  inferior  class  of  clergy  but  to  obey.  "  Are  ye  able"  (he  says  to 
the  Puritans,  p.  12.6),  "to  allege  any  just  and  sufficient  cause, 
wherefore,  absolutely,  ye  should  not  condescend  in  this  contro- 
versy, to  have  your  judgments  over-ruled  by  some  such  definitive 
sentence  ?"  He  insists  that  conscience  ought  to  give  way  to 
higher  authority — the  judgment  of  the  prelates ;  and  that  this 
"  Sentence  of  judgment  is  sufficient  for  any  reasonable  man's  con- 
science to  build  the  duty  of  obedience  upon,  whatsoever  his  own  opi- 
nion were,  as  touching  the  matter  before  in  question"  (p.  127.)  To 


"THE  JUDICIOUS  HOOKER."  131 

sustain  this  sentiment  he  quotes  the  law  of  the  Jewish  priesthood. 
"  That  man  which  will  do  so  presumptuously,  not  hearkening 
unto  the  priest  that  standeth  before  the  Lord  to  minister  there, 
nor  unto  the  judge,  let  him  die."  The  scope  of  the  principle  is 
this :  if  the  Pope,  or  a  general  council,  or  the  bishop  determine 
that  we  ought  to  kneel  to  the  host  of  the  Mass,  and  we  think  that 
so  to  do  is  a  sinful  idolatry,  their  sentence  is  enough  for  our 
conscience  ;  and  their  authority  is  above  all  the  decisions  or 
rights  of  conscience  ;  we  must  disobey  conscience  and  follow 
the  judgment  of  the  priests.  What  could  the  most  abject  devotee 
of  the  papacy  yield  to  the  power  of  the  priest  beyond  this  ?" 

But  Hooker  maintains  that  the  Church,  i.  e.  the  clergy,  i.  e. 
the  prelates,  or  rather  the  queen,  as  head  of  the  Church,  has  au- 
thority thus,  to 

"  Bind  the  conscience  in  their  chains." 

And  what  is  that  law  by  which  such  impositions  may  be  en- 
forced? The  law  of  iheChurch?  under  the  simple  penalty  of 
exclusion  from  her  pale  ?  Alas,  no  !  Yet  even  if  she  exclude  a 
man  from  her  pale,  in  the  time  of  Hooker,  he  loses  not  only  his 
privileges  as  a  member  of  the  Church,  but  all  his  legal  and  civil 
rights  ;  he  becomes  an  outlaw — helpless  and  defenceless.  The 
laws  which  Hooker  is  undertaking  to  justify  are  the  civil  laws ; 
demanding  obedience  to  ecclesiastical  canons,  and  enforcing 
these  canons  by  sequestrations,  fines,  imprisonment,  banishment, 
or  death.  If  people  will  not  come  to  church,  or  if  coming  they 
will  not  conform  ;  then  any  penalty  is  suitable  that  is  necessary 
to  compel  their  obedience.  Even  the  Court  of  High  Commis- 
sion, that  arbitrary  and  cruel  inquisition,  Hooker  coolly  attempts 
to  justify  as  a  very  suitable  and  proper  instrument  for  maintain- 
ing the  rights  and  prerogatives  of  the  Church,  against  those 
whose  consciences  should  prove  refractory  to  her  canons.  "  Ye 
have  given  us  already  to  understand,"  he  says,  in  his  address  to 
the  Puritans,  "  what  your  opinion  is  in  part  concerning  her  sacred 
Majesty's  Court  of  High  Commission ;  the  nature  whereof  is  the 
same  with  that  amongst  the  Jews,  albeit  the  power  is  not  so 
great."  *  *  *  *  "  As  for  the  orders  which  are  established 
with  reason  and  equity  and  the  law  of  nature,  God  and  man  do 
all  favor  that  which  is  in  being,  till  orderly  judgment  of  decision 
be  given  against,  it  is  but  justice  to  exact  of  you,  andperverseness 
in  you  it  should  be  to  deny  thereunto  your  willing  obedience " 
(p.  128). 

Such  is  the  outline  of  the  design  and  fundamental  principles 
of  the  famous  "  Ecclesiastical  Polity"  of  the  "  Judicious  Hook- 
er :''  a  scheme  of  despotism,  and  of  outrage,  both  upon  the  rights 
of  man  and  the  prerogatives  of  God.  These  are  the  principles 
deliberately  set  forth  as  the  justification  of  the  Church  in  her  con- 


132  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

troversy  with  the  Puritans.  This  scheme  of  tyranny  was  no  day- 
dream in  the  time  of  Hooker.  From  the  time  of  the  brutal 
Henry  VIII.  through  the  reign  of  the  Bloody  Mary,  and  from 
the  accession  of  Elizabeth  to  the  last  of  the  Stuarts,  these 
notions  so  hostile  to  liberty,  and  so  fraught  with  ecclesiastical 
usurpation  and  abuse,  were  carried  into  rigorous  practice.  By 
the  bishops'  mandates  and  by  decisions  of  the  bishops'  courts ;  by 
means  of  the  High  Commission  and  the  Star  Chamber,  a  rigorous 
and  relentless  enforcement  of  these  principles  was  maintained, 
through  fines,  imprisonments,  mannings,  and  even  by  the  inflic- 
tion of  death. 

To  these  principles  the  Puritans  opposed  the  principle  that 
GOD  ALONE  is  LORD  OF  THE  CONSCIENCE  :  that  every  man  has 
an  indefeasible  right  to  freedom  in  the  worship  of  God :  that 
what  God  has  not  enjoined  to  be  observed  as  a  ritual  in  his 
worship,  man  has  no  right  to  impose,  even  in  things  indifferent ; 
much  less  where  an  enlightened  conscience  cannot  yield  to  such 
impositions,  without,  in  its  own  view,  incurring  the  guilt  of 
idolatry,  or  of  some  other  heinous  sin  against  God. 

But  the  scheme  of  Hooker  is  not  yet  completed.  If  the  Church 
is  to  claim  such  prerogatives  over  the  judgment  and  conscience, 
she  must  in  all  reason  have  corresponding  benefits  to  bestow. 
If  "  God's  clergy"  that  "  State"  ecclesiastical  whereunto  "  the 
rest  of  God's  people  must  be  subject,"  are  to  possess  these  high 
powers,  that  clergy  should  also  be  endowed  with  the  power  of 
conferring  some  peculiar  benefits,  for  which  mankind  are  depend- 
ent on  their  hands.  The  claim  for  such  ghostly  authority  has  a 
natural  connection  with  a  corresponding  ghostly  power  for  the 
bestowal  of  spiritual  gifts. 

Accordingly,  we  find  the  two  claims  joined  in  the  great  work 
of  the  judicious  Hooker.  He  makes  his  scheme  of  doctrine  cor- 
respondent to  his  polity.  Having  given  to  the  clergy  authority  to 
rule  the  conscience  by  their  enactments  over  and  beyond  the 
word  of  God,  he  attributes  to  them  also,  power  to  bestow  grace 
by  sacraments,  over  and  beyond  the  sanctifying  power  which  the 
gospel  conveys,  under  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  when  it  is 
received  by  faith  alone. 

I  am  fully  aware  that  Hooker  is,  by  many,  considered  as  pure- 
ly and  strongly  evangelical ;  and  that  the  evangelical  party  in  the 
English  Church  earnestly  claim  him  as  maintaining  the  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith.  There  are  indeed  many  passages  in 
Hooker  wrhich,  taken  alone,  would  speak  that  doctrine.  There 
are  many  passages  of  exceeding  excellence  and  pungency.  So 
there  are  in  the  famous  Oxford  Tracts,  while,  nevertheless,  the 
scheme  is  substantially  that  of  Rome.  The  truth  is,  in  Hooker 
the  "  Iron  mixed  with  miry  clay."  His  work,  in  fact,  const:- 


133 

tutes  the  transition  state  between  the  evangelical  doctrines  of  the 
Reformers,  and  that  system  compounded  of  Armenianism  and 
Popery,  which  attained  its  maturity  under  the  auspices  of  Arch- 
bishop Laud  ;  and  which  is  now  again  extending  over  the  Eng- 
lish and  American  Episcopal  folds,  under  the  name  of  Pusey- 
ism:  and  hence,  like  the  Prayer-Book,  Hooker  is  most  consistently 
and  cogently  quoted  by  both  sides  in  the  Puseyistic  controversy. 
From  this  conflict  of  doctrine  in  Hooker,  as  well  as  from  other 
circumstances,  many  have  supposed  that  the  last  books  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  polity  were  written  by  another  hand,  and  falsely 
ascribed  to  Hooker.  But  as  to  the  matter  of  fact,  the  evidence,  as 
well  as  the  common  verdict,  is  on  the  other  side.  Indeed  it 
should  not  surprise  us  that  Hooker  should  be  deeply  imbued 
with  what  is  now  called  the  Puseyite  doctrine, — it  was  begin- 
ning to  prevail  in  his  day,  and  without  it,  his  scheme  of  polity 
would  have  been  incoherent  and  monstrous.  Whatever  may  be 
thought  of  subordinate  points  in  his  scheme  of  doctrine,  we  shall 
see  that  its  determining  principles  and  features  are  those  of  the 
scheme  which  denies  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone, 
and  teaches  rather  justification  by  the  sacraments  and  interven- 
tions of  a  sacerdotal  priesthood. 

But  let  Hooker  set  forth  the  fundamentals  of  his  scheme  in  his 
own  words. 

"Instruction  and  prayer,"  he  says  (p.  561,  Book  V.),  "are 
duties  which  serve  as  elements,  parts,  or  principles  "  [rudiments], 
"  to  the  rest  that  follow,  in  which  number  the  sacraments  of  the 
Church  are  chief.  The  Church  is  to  us  that  very  mother  of  our 
new  birth.  *  *  *  As  many,  therefore,  as  are  apparently  to 
our  judgment  born  to  God,  they  have  the  seed  of  their  regenera- 
tion by  the  ministry  of  the  Church ;  which  useth  to  that  end  and 
purpose,  not  only  the  word  but  the  sacraments,  both  having  gen- 
erative force  and  virtue"  He  continues  (p.  595),  "  That  saving 
grace  which  Christ  originally  is,  or  hath  for  the  general  good  of 
his  whole  Church,  by  sacraments  he  severally  deriveth  into  every 
member  thereof.  Sacraments  serve  as  the  instruments  of  God, 
to  that  end  and  purpose.  *  *  *  Where  the  signs  and  sacra- 
ments of  his  grace  are  not  either  through  contempt  unreceived, 
or  received  with  contempt,  we  are  not  to  doubt  but  they  REALLY 
VHVE  what  the-y  promise  and  what  they  signify.  For  we  take  not 
Baptism,  nor  the  Eucharist,  for  bare  resemblances,  or  memorials 
of  thing-s  absent,  neither  for  naked  signs  and  testimonies  assuring 
us  of  grace  received  before,  but  (as  they  are  indeed  and  in  verity) 
for  MEANS  EFFECTUAL,  whereby  God,  when  we  take  the  sacra- 
ments, DELIVERETH  INTO  OUR  HANDS  THAT  GRACE  AVAILABLE 
UNTO  ETERiNAL  LIFE." 

-     "  For,"  he  adds  (I.,  p.  602),  "  as  we  are  not  naturally  men 


134  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

without  birth,  so  neither  are  we  Christian  men  of  the  eye 
of  the  Church  of  God  but  by  new  birth ;  nor  (according  to  the 
manifest  ordinary  course  of  divine  dispensation)  new  born,  but 
by  that  BAPTISM,  which  both  declareth  and  maketh  us  Chris- 
tians. In  which  respect,  we  justly  hold  it  to  be  the  door  of  our 
actual  entrance  into  God's  house,  \hzfirst  apparent  BEG  INNING  OF 
LIFE  ;  a  seal  perhaps  to  the  grace  of  election  before  received,  but 
to  our  sanctification  here,  A  STEP  THAT  HATH  NOT  ANY  BEFORE 
IT."  In  this  connection,  Hooker  expressly  opposes  this  doctrine 
to  the  notion  of  justification  by  faith  alone  ;  declaring  that  notion 
to  "  draw  very  near  unto  the  error "  of  "  the  old  Valentinian 
Heretics,"  and  maintaining  on  the  contrary  that  "  Baptism  is 
necessary  to  take  away  sin;"  and  demanding  "  how  we  have  the 
fear  of  God  in  our  hearts,  if  care  of  delivering"  men's  souls  from 
sin  do  not  move  us  to  use  all  means  for  their  baptism"  The 
implication  is,  that  believe,  repent,  love  God,  give  the  whole  soul 
to  Christ,  it  all  avails  nothing  for  your  justification;  nor  does 
your  inward  sanctification  have  even  the  beginning  of  life,  until 
you  have  come  under  "  the  ministry  of  the  Church  "'in  baptism  ! 
Paul  taught  a  different  doctrine.  Abraham  was  justified  by  faith 
years  before  he  received  circumcision  as  a  sign  and  seal  of  that 
justification.  Surely  the  .sacrament  could  not  for  the  first  time 
bestow  that  which  Abraham  had  before.  The  Publican,  not  the 
Pharisee,  went  down  to  his  house  justified ;  but  was  there  any 
ritual  or  sacrament  in  the  case  ?  In  Christ  Jesus  neither  circum- 
cision availeth  anything,  nor  uncircumcision ;  but  a  new  crea- 
ture. The  new  creature  is  then  a  thing  entirely  distinct  from  the 
sacrament,  and  baptism  can  by  no  means  be  considered  identi- 
cal with  regeneration. 

As  to  the  efficacy  of  sacraments,  Hooker  does  not  suppose 
that  they  confer  grace  from  any  physical  operation  of  the  ele- 
ments, nor  yet  from  the  mere  action  of  the  Priest  (nor  perhaps 
does  the  "  opus  operatum  "  of  the  Papists  mean  to  go  so  far  as 
this),  but  he  says  (p.  594),  "  Their  chiefest  force  and  virtue  con- 
sisteth  not  herein"  [viz.  as  "  warrants  for  the  security  of  belief," 
or  as  marks  of  visible  "  distinction  to  separate  God's  own  from 
strangers  "] — "  but  they  are  heavenly  ceremonies  which  God  has 
sanctified  and  ordained  *  *  *  as  marks  whereby  to  know 
WHEN  God  doth  impart  the  vital  or  saving1  grace  of  Christ  unto 
all  that  are  capable  thereof;  and  secondly  as  means  conditional 
which  God  requireth  in  them  unto  whom  he  imparteth  the  grace. 
Seeing  therefore  that  grace  is  a  consequent  of  sacra- 
ments, a  thing'  which  accompanieth  them  as  their  end,  a  benefit 
which  they  have  received  from  God  himself  it  may 

hereby  be  understood  that  sacraments  are  necessary  "  &c. 

The  difference  between  this  doctrine  and  the  opus  operatum  of 


"THE  JUDICIOUS  HOOKER."  135 

Papists  appears  to  me  rather  nominal  than  real.  What  is  the 
practical  difference  between  holding  that  the  CEREMONY  itself  con- 
fers grace,  and  holding  that  God  kirns  elf  invariably  confers  grace 
SIMULTANEOUSLY  with  the  performance  of  the  ceremony?  The 
grace  in  either  case  comes  from  God  ;  in  the  one  case  directly, 
simultaneously  with  the  sign,  and  in  the  other  mediately,  through. 
the  sign.  In  both  cases  the  grace  is  alike  dependent  upon  the 
will  and  work  of  the  officiating  priest.  And  so  closely  are  the 
two  allied  in  the  mind  of  Hooker,  that  he  even  dips  into  the 
question  of  the  priest's  intention  in  the  performance  of  the  sacra- 
ment ;  a  question  so  important  in  the  popish  scheme  as  to  involve 
the  whole  efficacy  and  validity  of  the  sacrament  "  Further- 
more," says  Hooker  (p.  597-8),  "  *  *  we  must  note,  that  inas- 
much as  sacraments  are  actions  religious  and  mystical,  which  na- 
ture they  have  not  unless  they  proceed  from  a  serious  meaning 
(and  what  every  man's  private  mind  is,  as  we  cannot  know,  so 
neither  are  we  bound  to  examine) ;  therefore  always,  in  these 
cases,  the  known  intent  of  the  Church  doth  generally  suffice ;  and 
where  the  contrary  is  not  manifest,  we  may  presume,  that  he  who 
outwardly  doeth  the  act,  hath  inwardly  the  purpose  of  the  Church 
of  God." 

Let  us  now  turn  to  Hooker's  account  of  the  grace  conferred  by 
the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  He  supposes  that  a  person 
has  in  baptism  received  "  that  grace  available  unto  eternal  life ;" 
but  he  seems  also  to  suppose  that,  owing  to  the  decays  and  wear 
and  tear  of  the  gracious  principle  in  the  rough  vicissitudes  of  life, 
it  needs  to  be  recruited  and  aided  by  the  virtues  of  another  sacra- 
ment. Thus  he  says  (vol.  ii.,  p.  1) :  '-•And  it  may  be  that  the  grace 
of  baptism  would  serve  unto  eternal  life,  were  it  not  that  the  state 
of  our  spiritual  being  is  daily  so  much  hindered  and  impaired  after 
baptism"  "  Whereas,"  he  continues,  "  in  our  infancy  we  are  in- 
corporated unto  Christ,  and  by  baptism  we  receive  the  grace  of 
His  Spirit,  without  any  sense  or  feeling  of  the  gift  which  God 
bestoweth  ;  in  the  Eucharist  we  so  receive  the  gift  of  God  *  * 
that  his  flesh  is  meat  and  his  blood  drink,  not  so  surmised  in  im- 
agination, but  TRULY  ;  even  so  truly  that  through  faith  we  perceive 
in  the  body  and  blood  sacramentally  presented,  THE  VERY  TASTE 
OF  ETERNAL  LIFE  :  the  grace  of  the  sacrament  is  here  AS  THE 
FOOD  WHICH  WE  EAT  AND  DRINK." 

How  is  this  grace  bestowed  ?  What  is  its  nature  ?  Do  we 
receive  anything  else  than  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
the  Lord's  Supper?  Is  there  any  other  Real  presence  of  Christ, 
than  his  presence  by  his  Spirit  ?  Certainly  there  is,  according  to 
Hooker.  And  here  he  teaches  plainly  what  Pusey  dares  only 
teach  covertly  and  circuitously.  Hooker  maintains  (vol.  i.,  p. 
591),  that  besides  the  "  True  actual  influence  of  grace,"  "  the  DI- 


136 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


VINE  SUBSTANCE  of  Christ  is  in  all  the  members  of  Christ, 
is  with  the  whole  Church,  and  whole  with  every  part  of  the 
Church,  AS  TOUCHING  HIS  PERSON;"  that  "  The  parti- 
cipation of  Christ  imported,  besides  the  PRESENCE  OF  CHRIST'S 
PERSON,  a  true  actual  influence  of  grace  ;" — that  thus  we  partici- 
pate Christ  partly  by  imputation,  *  *  *  partly  by  habitual  and 
REAL  INFUSION."  He  moreover  denies  that  this  participation 
involves  "  any  mixture  of  the  substance  of  his  flesh  with  ours." 

The  papists  hold  that  the  priest  accomplishes  the  mysterious 
act  of  transubstantiation,  by  using  the  mysterious  words  hoc  est 
corpus  [this  is  my  body]  ;  which  the  priest  pronounces  in  a  low 
voice,  as  a  sort  of  mystic  incantation  (from  which  practice  come 
the  cant  words  of  profane  jugglers,  "  Hocus  Pocus").  Hooker 
believes  in  no  transubstantiation  of  bread,  but  he  holds  to  the 
mystical  virtue  of  the  words.  "  Furthermore,"  he  says,  "  seeing 
that  the  grace  which  we  here  receive  doth  no  \vay  depend  upon 
the  force  of  that  which  we  do  presently  behold,  it  was  of  necessity 
that  WORDS  of  express  declaration  should  be  added  unto  the  visible 
elements  that  the  one  might  infallibly  teach,  what  the  other  doth 
most  assuredly  bring  to  pass." 

"  How  cometh  it  to  pass,1'  he  inquires,  "  that  so  few  words  of 
so  high  mystery  beinguttered,  they  receive  with  gladness  the  gift 
of  Christ,  and  make  no  show  of  doubt  or  scruple  ?  He  answers  : 
"  The  bread  and  cup  are  his  body  and  blood,  because  they  are 
causes  instrumental,  upon  the  receipt  whereof,  the  participation  of 
his  body  and  blood  ensueth  ******  They"  [the  bread  and  wine] 
"  are  made  such  instruments  as  mystically,  yet  truly,  invisibly,  yet 
really,  work  our  communion  with  the  person  of  CHRIST." 

But  how  do  they  become  such  causes  instrumental  ?  Hooker 
thus  explains  it :"  "  This  hallowed  food,  through  concurrence  of 
divine  power,  is  in  verity  and  in  truth  unto  faithful  receivers  in- 
strumentally  a  cause  of  that  mystical  participation"  *  *  "  The 
real  presence  of  Christ's  most  blessed  body  and  blood,  is  not  there- 
fore to  be  sought/or  in  the  sacrament"  *  *  "  Whereupon  there 
ensueth  a  kind  of  transubstantiation  IN  us  ;  a  true  change  both  of 
body  and  soul ;  an  alteration  from  death  to  life."  "  The  very 
letter  of  the  word  of  Christ,"  says  Hooker,  "  gives  plain  security 
that  these  mysteries  do,  as  nails,  fasten  us  unto  his  very  cross; 
that  by  them,  we  draw  out,  as  touching  efficacy  and  force  and 
virtue,  even  the  blood  of  his  gored  side."  *  *  "  This  bread  hath 
in  it  more  than  the  substance  which  our  eyes  behold ;  this  cup, 
hallowed  with  solemn  benediction,  availeth  to  the  endless  life  and 
welfare  of  both  soul  and  body ;  with  touching  it  sanctifieth ;  it 
enlighteneth  ivith  belief;  it  truly  comforteth  us  unto  the  image  of 
Christ."  "What  moveth  us,"  he  adds,  to  argue  HOW  LIFE 
SHOULD  COME  BY  BREAD:  our  duty  being  here  to  take 


"THE  JUDICIOUS  HOOKER."  137* 

what  is  offered,  and  most  assuredly  to  rest  persuaded  of  this , 
THAT  CAN  WE  BUT  EAT,  WE  ARE  SAFE."  [Vol.  ii., 
p.  2.] 

Such  was  the  doctrine  of  the  "Judicious  Hooker:"  and  such 
was  the  doctrine  prevalent  in  the  English  Church  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth.  It  is  not  the  doctrine  of 
the  Thirty-Nine  Articles ;.  but  that  it  is  the  doctrine  of  the  offices 
of  the  Church  in  the  Prayer-Book,  every  one  may  see  by  a 
careful  recurrence  to  those  offices ;  and  we  have  before  seen  how 
this  confusion  between  the  Articles  and  the  offices  arose.  Thus : 
in  the  office  for  Baptism,  the  minister  is  directed  to  say,  "  Seeing 

*  *  that  this  child  is  now  regenerate"  &c.,  then  follows  the 
prayer :  "  We  yield  thee  hearty  thanks,  Most  Merciful  Father, 
that  it  hath  pleased  thee  to  regenerate  this  infant  with  thy  Holy 
Spirit,  and  to  receive  him  for  Thine  own  child  by  adoption"  &c. 
So  in  the  Catechism  before  Confirmation  ;  the  child  is  made  to 
answer,  "  My  sponsors  in  Baptism,  wherein  I  was  made  a  child 
of  God,  and  an  inheritor  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  Many 
evangelical  churchmen  have  tried  to  explain  away  these  words  : 
but  to  all  such  attempts  the  recent  charge  of  the  Bishop  of  Con- 
necticut has  given  an  everlasting  quietus,  at  least  in  Connecticut. 
"  I  know,"  says  the  bishop,  "  that  there  are  some  whose  views 
are,  perhaps,  tinctured  with  the  theology  I  have  referred  to  "  [of 
Edwards,  Wesley,  and  Whitfield]  "  who  would  willingly  explain 
away  the  language  of  our  baptismal  office.  But  after  all  I  have 
heard  and  read,  I  believe  there  is  but  little  real  difference  of  sen- 
timent among  churchmen  on  this  subject."  *  *  *  "  How- 
ever amicable  it  may  be  to  make  the  doctrine  more  acceptable  to 
dissenters,  the  effort  must  be  unavailing.  THE  FUNDAMENTAL 

PRINCIPLE    OF    THEIR    THEOLOGY  STANDS  DIRECTLY  OPPOSITE  IT." 

(Charge,  p.  22.) 

It  is  well.  This  doctrine  of  Baptismal  Regeneration  is  indeed 
"  DIRECTLY  OPPOSED"  to  the  "  FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES"  of  the 
evangelical  denominations  who  agree  with  the  theology  either  of 
Edwards,  Wesley  or  Whitfield.  Let  no  Jure-Divino  Church- 
man hereafter  tell  us  that  the  two  systems  are  the  same.  The 
bishop  has  spoken  no  less  truly  than  authoritatively,  that  the  two 
systems  are  DIRECTLY  and  FUNDAMENTALLY  opposed :  and  that 
all  efforts  to  reconcile  us  to  that  doctrine  "must  be  unavailing." 
We  hold  it  as  "  another  Gospel." 

The  doctrine  of  Hooker  on  the  Lord's  Supper  is  the  doctrine 
evidently  implied  in  the  office  for  administering  the  same,  in  the 
Prayer  Book.  The  consecration ;  the  laying  on  of  hands  on  "  all 
the  bread,  and  on  every  vessel  in  which  there  is  any  wine  to  be 
consecrated  ;"  the  going  over  again  with  the  ceremony  of  conse- 
crating more  when  the  first  supply  is  not  sufficient;  the  Oblation 


138  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

(the  poor  remains  of  the  lifting  of  the  Host,  under  the  notion  of 
offering  the  body  of  Christ  as  a  renewed  sacrifice),  the  remaining 
after  the  communion  reverently  to  eat  and  drink  what  remnants 
are  left  of  the  consecrated  meats,  that  nothing  be  carried  out  of  the 
church ;  all  these  things  come  from  the  same  popish  origin,  and 
are  but  in  accordance  with  the  same  popish  notions  of  the  sacra- 
ment which  Hooker  maintains.  I  think  it  must  be  evident,  that 
Hooker's  scheme,  as  it  was  the  scheme  of  those  who  gave  the 
offices  of  the  Church  of  England  their  final  establishment,  is  the 
true  exposition  of  those  offices  :  and  that  those  who  have  labored 
to  "  soften  or  explain  away"  the  language  of  those  offices,  are  en- 
tirely mistaken.  Puseyism  is  but  the  legitimate  revival  of  that 
scheme  which  was  laid  down  more  fully  and  unequivocally 
near  three  centuries  ago,  by  that  great  Oracle  of  the  English 
Church,  "  the  Judicious  Hooker." 

One  thing  is  further  necessary  to  be  noticed  to  complete  the 
system  of  Hooker,  and  that  is  the  account  which  he  gives  con- 
cerning the  power  of  Orders;  i.  e.  the  ghostly  power  conferred 
upon  priests  by  the  mystery  of  ordination.  He  says  (vol.  ii.,  p. 
82),  "  The  power  of  the  ministry  of  God"  [of  God's  ministers] 
"  translateth  out  of  darkness  into  glory  ;  it  raiseth  men  from  the 
earth,  and  bringeth  God  himself  from  heaven ;  by  blessing  visible 
elements  it  maketh  them  invisible  grace  ;  it  daily  giveth  the  Holy 
Ghost ;  it  hath  to  dispose  of  that  flesh  which  was  given  for  the 
life  of  the  world,  and  that  blood  which  was  poured  out  to  redeem 
souls  ;  when  it  pour  till  malediction  upon  the  heads  of  the  wicked, 
they  perish ;  when  it  revoketh  the  same,  they  revive.  O  wretched 
blindness,  if  we  admire  not  so  great  a  power  !  *  To  whom 

Christ  hath  imparted  power  both  over  that  mystical  body  which 
is  the  society  of  souls,  and  over  that  natural  [body]  which  is 
himself,  for  the  knitting  of  both  in  one  (a  work  which  antiquity 
doth  call  the  making  of  Christ's  body) ;  the  same  power  in  such 
is  both  termed  a  kind  of  mark  or  character,  and  acknowledged 
to  be  indelible."* 

*  With  this  scheme  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  of  the  power 
conferred  by  Ordination,  set  forth  by  Hooker  and  revived  by  the  Oxford  Tracta- 
rians,  Mr.  Chapin  (Editor  of  the  Chronicle  of  the  Church,  at  N.  Haven)  appears 
fully  to  agree.  In  his  recent  work  entitled  "  A  Churchman's  reasons  for  not  joining  in 
sectarian  worship"  in  which  he  sets  forth  the  impropriety  and  sin  of  an  Episcopa- 
lian's partaking  of  the  Lord's'  Supper,  or  joining  in  acts  of  public  worship  with 
other  denominations,  he  declares  that  the  elements  "  at  the  time  of  consecration" 
become  "  a  means  WHEREBY  grace  is  given  to  us  f  that  "all  the  power  that  has  been 
transmitted  from  the  apostles  vests  in  the  ministers  of  our"  [the  Episcopal]  "  Church-" 
that  Episcopal  ministers  and  they  alone  "  have  this  power  of  consecration  *  *  * 
"  by  the  act  of  consecrating"  [the  bread  and  wine]  "  to  make"  them  "  the  AUTHORI- 
TATIVE sign,"  *  *  and  "not  only  a  sign,  but  also  a  MEANS  WHEREBY  GRACE 
is  GIVEN  ;"  that  for  this  reason,  in  regard  to  the  Lord's  Supper  administered  by 
other  denominations,  "  We"  [Episcopalians]  "  know  it  is  not  the  same  table  that 
our  Father  gives  us"  *  *  "  that  their  table  is  not  the  table  our  Father  has  erect- 


"  THE    JUDICIOUS    HOOKER."  139 

Can  we  wonder  at  the  terrific  power  of  the  Popish  priesthood, 
and  at  the  abject  submission  in  which  they  hold  the  souls  of  their 
votaries,  when  such  a  doctrine  concerning  priestly  prerogatives 
is  put  forth  in  the  very  bosom  of  Protestant  Christendom ;  while 
the  great  author  of  such  a  scheme  of  despotism  and  superstition 
continues  to  be  held  in  the  highest  reverence,  and  retains  for  two 
centuries,  and  more,  the  epithet  of  "  The  Judicious"  given  him 
by  one  of  England's  worst,  weakest,  and  meanest  kings  ? 

Hooker's  biographer  notices  with  becoming  exultation,  that 
when  Hooker's  work  was  first  printed,  one  of  the  Cardinals  at 
Rome  declared  to  Pope  Clement  VIIL,  "  That  though  he  had 
lately  said  he  never  met  with  an  English  book  whose  writer 
deserved  the  name  of  author,  yet  there  now  appeared  a  wonder 
to  them,  and  it  would  be  so  to  his  Holiness,  if  it  were  in  Latin ; 
for  a  poor  obscure  English  priest  had  writ  four  books  of  laws 
of  Church  Polity,  and  in  a  style  that  expressed  so  grave  and 
such  humble  majesty,  with  clear  demonstration  of  reason,  that  in 
all  their  reading  they  had  not- met  with  any  that  exceeded  him." 
And  the  Pope,  when  he  had  heard  the  books  of  Hooker  read, 
declared  that  "  this  man  deserves  indeed  the  name  of  author — 
nothing  is  too  hard  for  this  man's  understanding."  It  is  to  us 
no  matter  of  wonder  that  Hooker's  Ecclesiastical  Polity  should 
meet  with  such  favor  at  Rome. 

It  is  well  known  how  much  Rome  thinks  of  such  "Holy  mor- 
tifications" as  fastings,  flagellations,  going  barefoot,  and  wearing 
sackcloth.  In  some  austerities  of  this  sort  Hooker  also  seems  to 
have  engaged  to  some  purpose  ;  for  his  biographer  records,  as 
one  of  the  things  for  which  Hooker  is  to  be  had  in  veneration, 
that  "  his  body  was  worn  out,  not  with  age,  but  with  study  and 
holy  mortifications" 

Nor  did  Hooker  seem  to  be  altogether  freed  from  all  ideas  of 
the  efficacy  of  Auricular  Confession  and  priestly  Absolution. 
His  biographer  records,  that  "  About  one  day  before  his  death, 
Dr.  Saravia,  who  kneio  the  very  secrets  of  his  soul  (for  they  were 
supposed  to  be  confessors  to  each  other\  came  to  him,  and  after 
a  conference  of  the  benefit,  necessity,  and  safety  of  the  CHURCH'S 
ABSOLUTION,  it  was  resolved  that  the  Doctor  should  give  him 
both  that  and  the  Sacrament  the  day  following.  To  which  the 
Doctor  came,  and  after  a  short  retirement  and  privacy,  they 
returned  to  the  company."  Thus  died  Hooker,  enveloped  still 
in  the  fogs  of  the  "  necessity  and  safety"  of  auricular  confession 
and  priestly  absolution  !  We  wonder  still  less  that  Hooker  should 
be  in  such  esteem  at  Rome. 

ed  for  us"  (these  Italics  are  his  own),  "  and  consequently  we  may  not  join  our- 
selves  to  it;"  and  he  adds,  "Iftkty  are  right,  we  have  corrupted  this  Holy  ordinance; 
but  if  we  are  right,  they  have  lost  sight  of  its  true  nature." 


140  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

These  principles  both  of  Church  Polity  and  of  doctrinal  faith, 
were  the  principles  against  which  the  Puritans  of  that  day  were 
called  to  stand.  They  are  the  principles  which  are  now  once 
more  raising  their  front,  and  with  honied  accents  striving  to  win 
their  way  once  more  to  the  reverend  acceptance  of  the  world. 
Happy  will  it  be,  if  the  friends  of  freedom  and  of  Christ,  warned 
by  the  sad  lessons  of  days  that  are  past,  take  the  alarm  and 
stand  manfully  for  the  truth  and  for  freedom  before  it  shall  be 
too  late. 


KING  JAMES  L,  AND   THE  GOING  TO  HOLLAND. 

Change  of  James'  Principles  on  his  accession  to  the  English  throne. 
Hampton  Court  Conference.  Hundred  and  forty-one  Canons.  Extra- 
judicial  decision  of  the  twelve  Judges.  Gathering  of  the  Pilgrim 
Church.  Flight  to  Holland. 

KING  JAMES,  of  Scotland,  came  to  the  throne  of  England,  A.  D. 
1603.  The  prelates  dreaded  his  accession,  and  spoke  of  it  with 
apprehension  as  the  coming  of  the  "  Scotch  Mist."  The  Puri- 
tans entertained  hopes  of  relief;  for  King  James  was  not  only  a 
Presbyterian,  but  he  had  subscribed  the  solemn  League  and  Co- 
venant. He  had,  often  and  solemnly,  declared  his  full  conviction 
of  the  pre-eminent  purity  and  excellence  of  the  Church  and  wor- 
ship of  Scotland.  Once  standing  in  the  General  Assembly  at 
Edinburgh,  with  his  bonnet  off  and  his  hands  lifted  up  to  Heaven, 
he  praised  God  that  he  was  born  in  the  time  of  the  true  light  of 
the  Gospel,  and  in  such  a  place  as  to  be  king  of  such  a  Church, 
the  sincerest  [purest]  kirk  in  the  world.  "  The  Church  of  Geneva," 
said  he,  "  keep  Pasche  and  Yule  "  [Easter  and  Christmas],  "  what 
have  they  for  them  ?  They  have  no  institution.  As  for  our  neigh- 
bor kirk  of  England,  their  service  is  an  evil  said  Mass  in  English ; 
they  want  nothing  of  the  Mass  but  the  liftings.  I  charge  you, 
my  good  ministers,  doctors,  elders,  gentlemen,  and  barons,  to 
stand  to  your  purity,  and  to  exhort  the  people  to  do  the  same." 

While  James  was  making  these  professions,  he  was  at  that 
very  time  "  carrying  on  a  correspondence  with  the  English  no- 
bles and  bishops,  and  promising  to  continue  that  very  Liturgy 
which  he  derided  as  an  ill-said  Mass.*  The  whole  character  of 
James  was  that  of  a  false  and  lying  prince  :  and  he  used  to  glory 
in  his  double  dealing  as  the  art  and  mystery  of  "kingcraft." 
After  his  arrival  in  England,  he  sank  into  drunkenness  and  low 
debauchery;  and  would  yet  from  time  to  time  with  tears  express 
his  hopes,  that  "  God  would  not  impute  unto  him  his  infirmity." 
Queen  Elizabeth  and  her  courtiers  saw  through  this  shallow 

*  Bogue  and  Bennett,  p.  52. 


142  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

monarch,  and  discovered  u  that  he  was  either  inclined  to  turn 
Papist,  or  to  be  of  no  religion."*  Such  was  the  man  who  was 
now  made  head  of  the  Church  of  England. 

While  James  was  on  his  way  to  take  possession  of  the  throne, 
a  petition  was  presented  to  him,  called  the  Millenary  petition 
from  being  subscribed  by  nearly  one  thousand  ministers  ; — desir- 
ing the  reformation  of  certain  ceremonies  and  abuses  of  the 
Church.  The  University  of  Oxford  came  out  against  the  peti- 
tion. "  Look,"  said  they,  "  upon  the  reformed  church  abroad  : 
whenever  the  desires  of  the  petitioners  take  place,  how  ill  it  suits 
with  the  state  of  monarchy."  They  commended  the  present 
church  establishment  to  the  sovereign,  as  the  great  support  of  the 
crown,  and  calculated  to  support  unlimited  subjection.  The 
heads  of  the  University  of  Cambridge  wrote  a  letter  of  thanks  to 
the  Oxonians ;  and  bade  the  "  poor  pitiful  Puritans"  (whom  they 
style  homunciones  miserrimi)  "  to  answer  their  almost  a  thousand 
books  in  defence  of  the  hierarchy,  before  they  pretend  to  dispute 
before  so  learned  and  wise  a  king."  The  truth  was,  that  the  Pu- 
ritans desired  nothing  more  than  a  fair  field  to  discuss  the  preten- 
sions of  the  hierarchy  ;  but  if  they  wrote,  their  books  were  stop- 
ped by  the  censorship  of  the  press ;  if  they  were  suspected  of 
uttering  anything  against  the  hierarchy,  they  were  imprisoned  or 
banished  ;  and  for  an  unpublished  manuscript  found  in  his  pos- 
session, Penry  had  been  hanged. 

The  king,  however,  to  furnish  himself  with  some  pretext  for 
his  own  apostasy  from  principles  which  he  had  so  often  avowed 
and  so  solemnly  subscribed,  or  to  give  some  color  of  regard  to 
the  millenary  petition,  and  possibly  to  indulge  himself  with  an 
opportunity  of  displaying  his  own  theological  lore,  appointed  a 
conference  between  himself  and  the  two  parties,  at  Hampton 
Court.  James  himself  nominated  nine  bishops  and  about  as 
many  other  dignitaries,  and  four  Puritan  divines  to  conduct  the 
conference  for  their  respective  parties. 

The  first  day  of  the  conference,  was  between  the  king  and 
bishops  and  deans  alone  ;  the  Puritans  being  excluded.  The 
king  made  a  speech  in  commendation  of  the  hierarchy  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  congratulated  himself  that  he  was  now 
come  into  the  promised  land  ;  that  he  sat  among  grave  and  rev- 
erend men,  and  was  not  a  king  as  formerly  without  a  State.  He 
assured  them,  that  he  had  not  called  this  assembly  for  any  inno- 
vation ;  and  declared,  "  That  howsoever  he  had  lived  among  the 
Puritans,  yet  since  he  was  ten  years  old,  he  ever  disliked  their 
opinions  ;  and  as  Christ  said,  though  he  lived  among  them,  he 
was  not  of  them." 

At  the   next   day's  conference,  four  Puritan  ministers  were 
*  Bp.  Burnet,  in  Bogue  and  Bennett. 


KING    JAMES    I.  143 

admitted.  When  Dr.  Reynolds  petitioned  that  the  ground  for 
confirmation  might  be  examined,  Bancroft  fell  upon  his  knees, 
and  begged  the  king  to  stop  the  Doctor's  mouth,  according  to  an 
ancient  canon,  that  schismatics  are  not  to  be  heard  against  their 
bishops.  The  king  at  last  settled  the  question  by  repeating  his 
now  favorite  maxim,  "  No  bishop,  no  king."  With  regard  to  the 
garments,  the  Puritan  ministers  ventured  to  express  a  doubt 
"  whether  the  power  of  the  Church  could  bind  the  conscience  with- 
out impeaching  Christian  liberty"  The  king  interrupted  them  at 
once  :  "  As  to  the  power  of  the  Church  in  things  indifferent,"  said 
his  majesty,  "  I  will  not  argue  that  point  with  you ;  but  answer 
as  kings  in  parliament,  Le  Roi  s'  avis  era"-— -the  king  shall  think 
of  that : — "but  as  to  liberty  in  ceremonies,  I  will  have  none  of 
that ;  I  will  have  one  doctrine,  one  discipline,  one  religion,  in  sub- 
stance and  in  ceremony ;  never  speak  more  to  that  point,  how  far 
you  are  bound  to  obey."* 

The  Puritans  desiring  that  the  clergy  might  have  liberty  for 
assemblies  once  in  three  weeks,  and  that  in  rural  deaneries  they 
might  have  the  liberty  of  prophesying  [conference  meetings], 
"  the  king  broke  out  into  a  flame,  and  told  the  ministers  they 
were  aiming  at  a  Scots'  Presbytery :  which,"  says  he,  "  agrees 
with  monarchy  as  well  as  God  with  the  devil."  Taming  to  the 
bishops,  he  put  his  hand  to  his  heart,  and  said,  "  My  lords,  I 
may  thank  you  that  these  Puritans  plead  for  my  supremacy ;  for 
if  once  you  are  out  and  they  are  in  place,  I  know  what  would 
become  of  my  supremacy;  for — no  bishop,  no  king."  Then 
turning  to  Dr.  Reynolds,  and  rising  from  his  chair,  the  king  said, 
"  If  this  be  all  your  party  have  to  say,  I  will  make  them  conform, 
or  I  will  harry  them  out  of  the  land,  or  else  hang  them,  that  is 
all."  Throughout  the  conference,  the  Puritan  ministers  were 
treated  with  brow-beating  and  insult.  As  the  king  grew  hot 
against  the  Puritans,  the  bishops  cheered  him  on  with  flatteries 
so  gross  as  to  have  disgusted  any  other  than  one  so  weak  and 
vain  as  King  James.  They  broke  out  into  exclamations  of 
wonder  at  his  wisdom ;  called  him  the  Solomon  of  the  age. 
Bancroft  fell  on  his  knees  and  said,  "  I  protest  my  heart  melteth 
for  joy,  that  Almighty  God  of  his  signal  mercy  has  given  us  such 
a  king  as  from  Christ's  time  has  not  been."  The  lord  chancel- 
lor said,  "  He  had  never  seen  the  king  and  priest  so  fully  united 
in  one  person."  The  king  was  equally  well  pleased  with  him- 
self, and  wrote  to  a  Scotsman,  that  he  "  had  soundly  peppered 
off  the  Puritans." 

The  third  day  of  the  conference,  was  between  the  king  and  the 
bishops  and  the  dignitaries  alone.  The  king  defended  the  court 
of  High  Commission,  the  subscription  to  the  Prayer-Book,  and 

*  Neale. 


144  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  oath  ex  officio.  One  of  the  lords  ventured  to  insist  that  the 
proceedings  of  the  High  Commissioners  Courts'  were  like  the 
Spanish  Inquisition,  and  that  by  the  oath  ex  qfficio  men  were 
forced  to  accuse  themselves.  But  the  king  vindicated  the  whole, 
and  declared  that  if  any  man  would  not  be  quiet  and  show  his 
obedience,  "  the  Church  were  better  without  him,  and  he  were 
worthy  to  be  hanged."  Archbishop  Whitgift  cried  out  in 
transport,  "  Undoubtedly  your  majesty  speaks  by  the  special 
assistance  of  God's  Spirit." 

A  few  alterations  of  the  Prayer-Book,  agreed  upon  by  the  king 
and  bishops,  was  all  the  reform  that  this  conference  afforded. 
One  result  of  the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  however,  was  our 
present  English  translation  of  the  Bible,  suggested  by  the  Puri- 
tan ministers,  who  complained  of  the  inaccuracy  of  the  version 
then  in  use. 

When  things  were  arranged  by  the  king  and  bishops,  the  four 
Puritan  ministers  were  called  in,  and  the  Hampton  Court  Con- 
ference, closed  by  the  declaration  of  the  king,  that  he  "would 
have  no  arguing  ;  let  them  conform,  and  that  quickly  too,  or  they 
should  hear  from  it."* 

The  king  issued  his  proclamation,  warning  the  Puritans  that 
there  was  to  be  no  toleration  of  non-conformity  :  they  must  con- 
form or  suffer  the  extremities  of  the  law.  In  his  opening  speech 
to  his  first  Parliament,  he  acknowledged  the  Romish  Church  to 
be  his  Mother- Church  :  he  said  he  would  indulge  their  clergy  if 
they  would  but  renounce  the  Pope's  supremacy,  and  his  pre- 
tended power  to  dispense  with  the  murder  of  kings.  He  wished 
there  might  be  a  means  of  uniting  the  two  religions  ;  and  said 
he  would  be  content  to  meet  them  midway.  But  as  to  the  Pu- 
ritans, said  the  king,  "  Their  sect  is  insufferable  in  any  well  gov- 
erned commonwealth."* 

The  bishops  were  pleased  with  this  speech.  The  thoroughly 
Protestant  part  of  the  nation  heard,  with  alarm,  the  king's  offer 
to  meet  the  Papists  half  way.  "  What  does  he  mean  ?  Is  there 
no  difference  between  Popery  and  Protestantism  but  the  Pope's 
Supremacy  ?  Is  this  the  only  point  on  which  we  are  separated 
from  Rome  ?" 

In  the  Parliament,  it  appeared  that  the  principles  of  the  Puri- 
tans had  taken  deep  root.  There  were  those  who  dared  to  assert 
the  liberties  of  the  people  with  such  spirit  and  vigor  that  the  king 
declared  "  he  would  rather  live  like  a  hermit  in  a  forest,  than  be 
king  over  such  a  people  as  the  pack  of  Puritans  that  overruled 
the  lower  house." 

The  convention  of  the  clergy,  meeting  at  the  same  time  with  the 
Parliament,  busied  themselves  in  framing  a  book  of  one  hundred 
*  Neale.  t  Neale,  and  Prince. 


KING    JAMES    I.  145 

and  forty-one  canons,  aimed  chiefly  at  the  Puritans.  Whoever 
should  speak  against  the  Apostolic  character  and  authority  of  the 
Church  of  England,  or  against  its  worship,  or  articles  or  ceremo- 
nies, or  its  government  by  archbishops,  bishops,  deans,  or  arch- 
deacons,— or  against  the  form  and  manner  of  ordaining  bishops, 
priests  or  deacons,  or  separate  from  its  communion,  or  allow  the 
claims  of  any  other  in  England  to  be  a  Church  ; — whoever  should 
do  any  of  these  things,  was  to  be  by  that  very  deed  excommu- 
nicated, with  no  power  anywhere  to  restore  him  save  the  arch- 
bishop, and  that  only  after  repentance  and  public  "  revocation  of 
his  wicked  error."  Nor  was  this  excommunication  a  simple  ex- 
clusion from  the  privileges  of  the  Church  :  the  excommunicated 
person  was  incapable  of  suing  for  his  just  dues ;  he  might  be 
imprisoned  till  such  time  as  he  should  make  satisfaction  to  the 
Church  ;  and  at  his  death  he  must  be  denied  Christian  burial.* 

Whitgift  died  a  few  weeks  after  the  Hampton  Court  Confer- 
ence, and  the  fierce  Bancroft  was  made  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury in  his  room.  It  was  he  who  in  A.  D.  1588,  first  publicly 
maintained  in  England,  the  right  of  Diocesan  Bishops  above 
Presbyters  by  divine  appointment  ;  the  common  doctrine  of  the 
Reformers,  and  of  those  who  preceded  them  for  centuries,  having 
been,  that  by  divine  institution,  Bishops  and  Presbyters  were 
one  and  the  same :  and  that  a  Diocesan  is  superior  to  a  Presby- 

*  One  or  two  of  these  141  Canons  will  serve  as  a  specimen  of  the  whole: 

Canon  4.  "  Whosoever  shall  affirm  the  form  of  God's  worship  in  the  Church  of 
England  established  by  law,  and  contained  in  the  book  of  Common  Prayer,  and 
administration  of  sacraments,  is  a  corrupt,  superstitious,  and  unlawful  worship,  or 
contains  anything  repugnant  to  Scripture,  let  him  be  excommunicated,  ipso  facto, 
and  not  restored  but  only  by  the  Archbishop,  after  his  repentance  and  public  revo- 
cation of  his  wicked  error." 

Canon  6.  "  Whosoever  shall  affirm  that  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church 
of  England  as  by  law  established,  are  wicked,  anti-christian,  or  superstitious,  or 
such  as  being  commanded  by  lawful  authority,  good  men  may  not  with  a  good  con- 
science approve,  use,  or  as  occasion  requires,  subscribe, — let  him  be  excommu- 
nicated," &c. 

Canon  11.  "  Whosoever  shall  affirm  that  there  are  within  this  realm  other  meetings, 
assemblies,  or  congregations  of  the  king's  born  subjects,  than  such  as  are  established 
by  law,  which  may  rightly  challenge  to  themselves  the  name  of  lawful  churches,  let 
them  be  excommunicated,"  &c. 

Canon  7.  "  Whosoever  shall  affirm  that  the  government  *  *  of  the  Church 
of  England,  by  archbishops,  bishops,  deans,  archdeacons,  and  the  rest  that  bear  office 
in  the  same,  is  anti-christian  or  repugnant  to  the  Word  of  God,  let  him  be  excom- 
municated." &c. 

Canon  8  denounces  the  same  upon  those  who  speak  against  the  forms  of 
ordination. 

Canon  14  denounces  the  same  upon  such  as  shall  add  to,  or  leave  out  any  part  of 
the  prayers. 

Canon  18,  in  like  manner  enjoins  bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus.  Four  others  re- 
late to  the  wearing  of  habits ;  one  forbids  requiring  parents  to  be  present  at  the  bap- 
tism of  their  children,  and  forbids  their  answering  as  God-parents.  The  book  con- 
cluded with  denouncing  the  anathema  of  excommunication  upon  all  who  should 
deny  that  the  Assembly  making  the  Canons  was  not  the  true  Church  of  England  by 
representation. 

10 


146  THfi  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ter,  only  bylaws  of  human  appointment.  Bancroft  was  a  rough, 
violent  man,  and  a  declared  enemy  of  the  religious  and  civil 
rights  of  the  people ;  the  creature  and  tool  of  the  royal  preroga- 
tives. 

To  the  tender  mercies  of  this  man,  the  Puritans  were  now 
committed,  with  canons,  laws,  excommunications,  oaths  ex  offi- 
cio,  prisons,  and  every  other  engine  of  tyranny  made  ready  to 
his  hand.  He  began  his  career  as  archbishop,  by  reviving  the 
strict  observance  of  all  the  saints'-days  and  festivals  of  the 
Church ;  by  reinstating  the  use  of  capes,  caps,  and  hoods ;  by 
obliging  the  clergy  to  subscribe  the  articles  over  again,  with  an 
additional  avowal,  "that  they  did  it  willingly  and  from  the  heart." 
Three  hundred  Puritan  ministers,  who  had  not  separated  from 
the  established  Church,  were  silenced,  imprisoned,  or  exiled  in 
the  year  1604* 

The  king,  to  strengthen  his  hands  against  the  Puritans,  sum- 
moned the  twelve  judges  into  the  Star  Chamber,  to  obtain,  by 
an  anticipated  and  extra-judicial  decision  of  the  judges,  some 
sanction  for  further  severities  which  he  contemplated.  Having 
secured  their  sentence  in  favor  of  the  past  proceedings  of  the 
High  Commission,  and  of  the  lawfulness  of  imposing  the  oath 
ex  officiO)  the  king  propounded  to  the  judges,  "whether  it  be  an 
offence  punishable,  and  what  punishment  they  deserved,  who 
framed  PETITIONS,  and  collected  a  multitude  of  hands  thereto,  to 
prefer  to  the  king  in  a  public  cause,  as  the  Puritans  had  done : 
with  an  intimation  to  the  king,  that  if  he  denied  their  suit,  many 
thousands  of  his  subjects  would  be  discontented."  The  judges 
replied,  that  it  was  an  offence  punishable  at  discretion,  and  very 
near  to  treason  and  felony  in  the  punishment ;  for  it  tended  to 
raising  sedition,  rebellion,  and  discontent  among  the  people." 
In  this  decision,  all  the  judges  agreed. 

Thus,  the  king  might  make  such  orders  in  religious  affairs  as  he 
pleased,  and  enforce  the  same  by  his  High  Commission.  Should 
any  attempt  even  to  petition  for  redress,  they  were  fineable  at 
pleasure,  and  in  danger  of  suffering  an  arraignment  for  felony  or 
treason.  "  A  later  convocation"  says  Bancroft,!  " denied  every 
doctrine  of  popular  rights,  asserting  the  superiority  of  the  king 
to  the  Parliament  and  the  laws,  and  admitting,  in  their  zeal  for 
absolute  monarchy,  no  exception  to  the  doctrine  of  passive  obe- 
dience. Thus  the  opponents  of  the  Church  became  the  sole 
guardians  of  popular  liberty  :  the  lines  of  the  contending  parties 
were  distinctly  drawn ;  the  established  Church  and  the  mon- 
arch on  one  side  were  arrayed  against  the  Puritan  clergy  and 
people." 

The  whole  body  of  the  clergy  of  London  were  summoned  to 
*  Bancroft's  U.  States.  f  Hist.,  vol  i.,  p.  209. 


THE    PILGRIM    CHURCH.  147 

Lambeth  to  subscribe  over  again ;  "  but  such  numbers  refused, 
that  the  churches  were  in  danger  of  being  disfurnished."  In 
twenty-four  counties,  there  were  746  of  the  clergy  who  refused 
to  conform ;  and  it  was  estimated  that  the  whole  number  of  non- 
conforming  clergy  in  the  kingdom,  was  from  thirteen  to  fifteen 
hundred.  Again  and  again  had  the  Puritan  ministers  been  sifted 
out  of  the  Church  by  new  tests ;  but  the  more  the  plants  of  free- 
dom were  weeded  out,  the  more  they  seemed  to  grow.  At  the 
time  when  the  Pilgrims  were  driven  to  Holland,  it  was  supposed 
that  riot  twenty  ministers  known  to  be  in  favor  of  their  princi- 
ples were  left  in  the  Church  of  England ;  but  in  a  few  years 
they  were  as  numerous  as  ever. 

The  bishops  were  amazed ;  and  shrunk  from  carrying  out 
fully  the  measures  which  they  had  begun.  But  great  were  the 
sufferings  endured  by  the  Puritans,  both  ministers  and  people. 

These  oppressions  at  length  became  intolerable ;  and  the 
victims,  seeing  no  hope  of  relief,  and  no  prospect  before  them 
but  destruction,  began  to  turn  their  eyes  to  a  foreign  shore. 

rHere  we  come  to  the  commencement  of  the  WANDERINGS  OF 
THE  PILGRIM  FATHERS.  The  Church  of  the  Pilgrims,  who  first 
landed  on  the  rock  of  Plymouth,  was  organized  in  England  in 
the  year  1602 ;  and  in  1607  and  1608  was  driven  to  Holland  by 
the  persecutions  under  King  James  I.  Bradford,  the  second 
governpr  of  the  colony  of  Plymouth,  and  one  of  the  Pilgrims  in 
all  their  perils  and  wanderings,  gives  this  account  of  the  forma- 
tion of  that  Church : — "  When  by  the  travail  and  diligence  of 
some  godly  and  zealous  preachers,  and  God's  blessing  on  their 
labors,  as  in  other  places  of  the  land,  so  in  the  North  parts,  many 
became  enlightened  with  the  word  of  God,  and  had  their  igno- 
rance and  sins  discovered  by  the  word  of  God's  grace,  and  began 
by  his  grace  to  reform  their  lives  and  make  conscience  of  their 
ways ;  the  work  of  God  was  no  sooner  manifest  in  them,  but  pre- 
sently they  were  both  scoffed  and  scorned  by  the  profane  multitude  ; 
and  the  ministers  were  urged  with  the  yoke  of  subscription  or  else 
must  be  silenced,  and  the  poor  people  were  so  urged  ivith  appari- 
tors and  pursuivants,  and  the  Commission  Courts,  as  truly  their 
affliction  was  not  small."  For  years  they  continued  to  bear  these 
persecutions.  At  length  they  began,  says  Bradford,  "  To  see 
further  into  these  things  by  the  light  of  God's  Word.  By  this 
they  saw,  that  the  imposition  of  these  "  Base  and  beggarly  cere- 
monies "  was  "  unlawful  ;"  that  the  "  Lordly  and  tyrannous 
power  of  the  prelates"  was  contrary  to  the  gospel ;  and  that  their 
authority  to  " load  men's  consciences" — "ought  not  to  be  sub- 
mitted to." 

They  therefore,  "  shook  off  this  yoke  of  anti-Christian  bondage, 
and  as  the  Lord' s  free  people  joined  themselves  by  a  covenant  of 


148  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  Lord,  in  a  Church  estate,  in  the  fellowship  of  the  gospel,  to 
walk  in  all  the  ways  made  known,  or  to  be  made  known  unto 
them,  according  to  their  best  endeavors,  whatever  it  should  cost 
them."* 

Thus  was  formed  the  first  of  the  Puritan  Churches  of  New 
England  ;  the  model  of  the  rest.  It  was  the.  fruit  of  a  REVIVAL 
OF  RELIGION  ;  composed  of  men  who  had  tasted  the  grace  of 
God ;  who  felt  that  the  rites  and  forms  of  the  established  Church 
were  indeed  "  beggarly" — inadequate  to  express,  and  too  narrow 
to  give  scope  to  the  warmest  devotions  of  a  new-born  sou]. 
They  saw  that  the  power  of  the  bishop  was  hostile  to  true  reli- 
gion ;  and  discovered  that  it  was  unfounded  in  the  Word  of  God. 
They  perceived  that  a  national  establishment,  in  which  churches 
are  gathered  indiscriminately  by  "  street  rows,"  must  ever 
embrace  the  world  in  its  bosom,  and  of  necessity  must,  in  spite 
of  all  articles,  become  corrupt  in  doctrine  and  in  discipline,  in 
order  to  suit  the  views  and  taste  of  a  world,  which,  in  its  present 
state,  is  at  enmity  with  God.  In  perilous  times  they  came  out 
from  a  Church  gathered,  organized,  and  governed  on  worldly 
principles  ;  and  regarded  their  coming  out  from  such  a  Church, 
as  coming"  out  from  the  WORLD.  At  the  sacrifice  of  all  their 
worldly  interests,  and  with  the  certain  prospect  of  imprisonment 
or  exile,  they  formed  themselves  into  a  Church  of  Christ ;  taking 
his  Word  for  their  guide,  and  on  the  very  principle  of  denying 
entirely  the  doctrine  of  baptismal  regeneration,  and  of  grace 
conferred  by  priestly  prerogatives  and  interventions  ;  doctrines 
which  naturally  constitute  the  basis  of  all  national  Church 
establishments;  and  which  are  very  sure,  sooner  or  later,  to 
insinuate  themselves  into  all  Christian  institutions,  where  no 
distinction  is  made  between  the  parish  and  the  Church. 

The  Church  which  had  been  gathered  in  1602,  became  so 
numerous,  and  its  members  were  so  widely  scattered  in  Not- 
tinghamshire, Lincolnshire,  and  in  some  parts  of  Yorkshire,  that 
in  1606  it  became  two  distinct  churches.  Of  one  of  these  Mr. 
John  Smith  was  pastor.  Of  him,  Governor  Bradford  says,  he 
"  was  an  eminent  man  in  his  time,  a  good  preacher  and  of  good 
parts."  He  was  one  of  them  who  had  been  sent  to  prison  for 
worshipping  separately  in  1592.  Driven  out  by  persecution, 
he  and  many  of  his  Church  settled  at  Amsterdam,  where  he  and 
many  of  his  people  became  Baptists.  Mr.  Smith  being  at  a 
loss  for  a  proper  administrator  immersed  himself,  and  then 
administered  the  rite  to  others.  Afterwards  he  embraced  the 
Arminian  sentiments  ;  and  in  1610  he  died.  Soon  after  his 
death,  many  of  his  people  considering  it  wrong  to  flee  fromper- 

•  Bradford's  Journal,  in  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims. 


THE  PILGRIM  CHURCH.  149 

secution,  returned  to  England,  and,  as  is  generally  supposed, 
became  the  first  congregation  of  the  English  General  (or  Arrni- 
nian)  Baptists.* 

The  other  branch  of  the  Church  became  the  first  of  the  Pil- 
grim Fathers  of  New  England.  The  pastors  of  this  Church,  were 
Richard  Clifton  and  John  Robinson.  William  Brewster,  who 
came  with  the  Pilgrims  to  New  England,  was  Teacher  and 
ruling  Eider.  Gov.  Bradford,  who  was  one  of  the  Pilgrims  both 
in  their  flight  to  Holland  and  in  their  removal  to  America,  says 
of  Mr.  Clifton,  that  he  was  "  A  grave  and  fatherly  old  man  when 
he  first  came  to  Holland,  having  a  great  white  head ;  and  pity  it 
was  that  such  a  reverend  old  man  should  be  forced  to  go  into 
exile.  But  it  was  his  lot,  and  he  bore  it  patiently.  Much  good 
had  he  done  in  the  country  where  he  lived,  and  converted  many 
to  God  by  his  faithful  and  painful  ministry.  Sound  and  ortho- 
dox he  was,  and  so  continued  to  his  end." 

Of  John  Robinson,  his  friends  uniformly  spoke  in  terms  of 
the  profoundest  veneration,  and  his  enemies  with  the  utmost 
respect.  "  He  was  a  man,"  says  Gov.  Bradford,  "  not  easily 
paralleled  for  all  things,  *  *  a  man  learned,  of  solid  judg- 
ment, of  a  quick  sharp  wit,  of  a  tender  conscience,  and  very 
sincere  in  all  his  ways."  Baylie,  the  bitter  enemy  of  the  Puri- 
tans, says,  that  "  Robinson  was  a  man  of  excellent  parts,  and  the 
most  polished  and  modest  spirit  that  ever  separated  from  the 
Church  of  England."!  The  writings  of  Robinson  tlrat  remain, 
fully  justify  the  highest  character  given  of  him  by  his  friends. 
Able,  clear,  discriminating,  deeply  learned,  patient,  laborious, 
honest  and  candid,  in  an  uncommon  degree  for  this  world,-— 
uniting  distinguished  humility  and  meekness  with  dauntless 
courage, — Robinson  was  a  fine  model  of  the  Puritan  character; 
and  happily  was  he  mated  in  his  compeer  and  fellow  laborer 
Brewster,  who,  on' their  arrival  at  Leyden,  was  chosen  teaching 
elder  of  the  same  Church.  In  his  early  years,  Brewster  had  been 
employed  in  an  embassy  to  the  Low  Countries,  and  had  long 
been  known  as  a  man  of  character  and  capacity.  He  had  long 
been  distinguished  for  his  piety,  and  for  his  zeal  and  sacrifices 
in  endeavoring  to  do  good.  For  thirty-six  years  he  bore  his 
part  in  all  the  sorrows  and  sufferings  of  the  Pilgrim  Church; 
the  last  twenty-four  of  which  were  spent  at  Plymouth,  where, 
at  the  age  of  four-score  years,  he  died,  the  venerated  patriarch  of 
the  first  generation  of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of  New  England. 

The  Church  of  which  Robinson  and  Brewster  were  ministers, 
was  composed  of  choice  men.  It  required  a  deep  insight  into 
God's  Word,  great  sincerity  of  conscience,  a  religious  integrity 
too  strong  to  be  overcome  by  losses  or  perils,  or  to  be  seduced 

*  Murdock's  Mosheim,  iii.,  p.  219.    f  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,  p.  453. 


150 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


by  the  love  of  ease,  of  comfort,  or  a  home.  It  required  some 
deep  experience  of  the  work  of  God  in  the  soul  to  make  one 
willing  to  come  out  of  the  established  Church,  and  to  join  his  lot  to 
that  of  the  persecuted  Puritans.  Ignorant  minds  could  not  appre- 
ciate the  Puritan  principles.  Fanatical  minds  would  be  worn  out 
by  the  long  continued  sufferings  that  were  to  be  endured ;  and 
by  the  caution  and  steadiness  required  to  walk  warily  amid  the 
treacheries  and  snares  that  surrounded  the  Puritans.  Light  and 
wavering  spirits  were  sure  to  be  brushed  away  by  the  rough  hand 
of  adversity.  Nothing  but  intelligence  to  discern  the  truth,  love 
to  God,  deep  principles  of  religious  integrity  and  faith,  and  cour- 
age and  firmness  too  strong  for  earth  or  hell  to  overcome,  could 
make  a  man  a  Puritan  in  those  days.  God  was  about  to  plant 
the  Christian  "religion  pure  in  a  new  world  ;  in  a  vast  and  impor- 
tant field,  that  had  been  kept  vacanl,  in  reserve  for  the  last  great 
scene  of  the  great  drama  of  all  time ;  and  in  the  furnace  of 
affliction  he  chose  the  instruments  of  that  great  work.  Its  fruits 
the  world  has  just  begun  to  reap,  in  results  of  freedom,  enterprise, 
and  pure  religion,  which  have  already  made  the  embarkation  of 
the  Pilgrims,  and  the  sorrowful  parting  at  Delft-Haven,  one  of 
the  great  epochs  in  the  history  of  time. 

The  Pilgrim  Church  was  now  on  the  eve  of  its  removal.  "  They 
could  not,"  says  Bradford,  "  continue  in  any  peaceable  manner  j 
but  were  hunted  and  persecuted  on  every  side."  Some  were 
seized  and  imprisoned,  others  had  their  houses  watched  night 
and  day,  and  with  difficulty  escaped.  Most  were  glad  to  flee, 
leaving  their  houses  and  their  means  of  livelihood.  "  Seeing 
themselves  thus  molested,  and  that  there  was  no  hope  of  their 
continuance,"  says  Bradford,  "  they  resolved  to  go  into  the  Low 
countries,  where  they  heard  was  freedom  of  religion  for  all  men.''1 
Yet  here  difficulties  awaited  them  ;  it  was  a  strange  land,  and 
they  were  to  sojourn  among  a  people  of  a  strange  speech.  The 
people  there  lived  mainly  by  trades  and  traffic ;  but  the  Pilgrims 
were  accustomed  only  to  till  the  ground.  The  adventure 
seemed  to  them  almost  desperate  ;  yet  liberty  of  conscience  and 
a  pure  religion  seemed  to  them  worth  more  than  life. 

But  their  persecutors  were  unwilling  to  let  them  escape.  The 
ports  and  harbors  were  closed  against  them.  They  were  obliged 
secretly  to  hire  mariners  at  exorbitant  rates,  to  take  them  in  at 
remote  and  unfrequented  places  ;  and  even  here  they  were  be- 
trayed and  surprised,  and  put  to  indescribable  losses  and  suffer- 
ings. Out  of  many  such  troubles  Bradford  relates  two  as  speci- 
mens of  the  whole.  A  great  company  had  hired  a  vessel  to  take 
them  from  Boston  in  Lincolnshire,  and  made  an  agreement  with 
the  master  to  be  ready  on  a  certain  day,  to  take  them  and  their 
goods  in  at  a  convenient  place,  where  all  would  be  in  readiness. 


THE  FLEEING  TO  HOLLAND.  151 

"  So,"  says  Bradford,  "  after  a  long  waiting,  and  large  expenses, 
though  he  kept  not  day  with  them,  yet  he  came  at  length  and 
took  them  in  the  night.  And  when  he  had  them  and  their  goods 
aboard,  he  betrayed  them  ;  having  beforehand  complotted  with 
the  searchers  and  other  officers  so  to  do  ;  who  took  them  and 
put  them  into  open  boats,  and  there  rifled  and  ransacked  them, 
searching  them  to  their  very  shirts  for  money ;  yea,  even  the 
women,  further  than  became  modesty  ;  and  then  carried  them 
back  into  the  town,  and  made  them  a  spectacle  and  a  wonder- 
ment to  the  people  who  came  flocking  on  all  sides  to  behold 
them."*  Stripped  of  their  money,  books  and  goods,  they  were 
brought  before  the  magistrates  and  committed  to  prison ;  when, 
after  being  detained  a  month,  the  greater  part  were  dismissed  ; 
but  seven  of  the  principal  men  were  kept  in  prison  to  the  next 
assizes.  Among  those  who  were  set  free,  was  Bradford,  then  a 
young  man  of  18  years  ;  who,  after  many  perils  by  land  and  sea, 
found  his  way  to  Holland.  Breivster  was  among  the  number 
of  those  detained  in  prison. 

The  next  year  (1608),  a  large  number  agreed  with  the  master 
of  a  Dutch  ship  to  take  them  in  between  Grimsby  and  Hull, 
"  where  was  a  large  common  a  good  way  distant  from  any  town." 
The  women  and  children  and  go^ds  were  sent  to  the  place  in  a 
small  bark,  while  the  men  were  to  make  the  best  of  their  way  by 
land.  The  bark  arriving  a  day  too  soon,  and  the  sea  being  rough, 
the  women  prevailed  with  the  seamen  to  put  in  at  a  small  creek, 
where  at  low  water  they^were  aground.  "  The  next  morning 
the  ship  came  ;  the  captain  sent  his  boats  to  bring  off  the  men 
whom  he  saw  walking  on  the  shore.  But  after  the  first  boat-full 
was  got  aboard,  and  he  was  ready  to  go  for  more,  the  master  es- 
pied a  great  company  both  horse  and  foot,  with  bills,  and  guns, 
and  other  weapons,  for  the  country  was  raised  to  take  them." 
"  The  Dutchman  seeing  that,"  says  Bradford,  "swore  his  coun- 
try's oath,  and  having  the  wind  fair,  weighed  anchor,  hoisted  sails, 
and  away."  "  But  the  poor  men  which  were  got  on  board, 

were  in  great  distress  for  their  wives  and  children,  which  they 
saw  thus  to  be  taken  ;  and  even  left  destitute  of  their  helps ;  and 
themselves  also  not  having  a  cloth  to  shift  them  with  more  than 
they  had  on  their  backs,  and  scarce  a  penny  about  them  ;  all 
they  had  being  on  board  the  bark.  It  drew  tears  from  their  eyes, 
and  anything  they  had,  they  would  have  given  to  be  on  shore 
again."  Bradford  might  well  attest  this,  for  he  was  among  those 
on  board  the  ship.  A  storm  arose.  For  seven  days  they  saw 
neither  sun,  moon,  nor  stars.  They  were  driven  to  the  coast  of 
Norway.  The  mariners  themselves  gave  up  hopes  of  life,  and 
"  once  with  shrieks  and  cries  gave  over  all  as  if  the  ship  had  been 

*  Bradford,  in  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims. 


152  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

foundered  in  the  sea.  But  when  the  men's  help  wholly  failed," 
says  Bradford,  "  the  Lord's  power  and  mercy  appeared  for  their 
recovery  ;  for  the  ship  rose  again,  and  gave  the  mariners  courage 
again  to  manage  her;  and  if  modesty  should  suffer  me,"  says 
Bradford,  "  I  might  declare  with  what  fervent  prayers  they  cried 
unto  the  Lord  in  their  great  distress,  especially  some  of  them, 
even  without  any  distraction,  when  the  water  ran  into  their  very 
ears  and  mouths,  and  the  mariners  cried  out.  We  sink, — they 
cried,  Yet,  Lord,  thou  canst  save  ;  yet,  Lord,  thou  canst  save." 

That  ship  bore  the  destinies  of  New  England.  It  was  not 
the  will  of  God  that  she  should  perish.  The  storm  abated; 
they  arrived  at  their  haven. 

But  that  pitiful  group  of  their  companions  left  on  the  shore, 
and  on  that  bark  : — the  men  seeing  the  troops  surrounding  them 
made  their  escape ;  all  save  some  who  offered  themselves  to  re- 
main, to  do  what  could  be  done  for  the  women  and  children. 
"  But  it  was  pitiful,"  says  Bradford,  "  to  see  the  heavy  case  of 
these  poor  women  in  this  distress  ;  what  weeping  and  crying  on 
every  side ;  some  for  their  husbands  that  were  carried  away  in 
the  ship;  *  others  not  knowing  what  should  become  of 

their  little  ones :  others  melted  in  tears,  seeing  their  poor  ones 
hanging  about  them,  crying  %r  fear  and  quaking  with  cold." 

The  women  were  apprehended,  and  hurried  with  their  children 
from  place  to  place,  from  one  magistrate  to  another.  To  im- 
prison women  and  innocent  children  for  no  crime  than  that  of 
going  with  their  husbands  and  fathers^  seemed  hard.  They  had 
no  houses  to  which  the  magistrates  might  send  them  :  their 
houses  and  livings  being  sold.  They  were,  however,  made  to 
suffer  for  some  time,  till  at  length  their  persecutors,  not  knowing 
what  to  do  with  them,  suffered  them  to  go  at  large. 

These  were  the  mothers  of  New  England.  This  was  the 
beginning  of  their  pilgrimage.  It  was  with  more  comfort  and 
hope,  twelve  years  after  this,  that  they  greeted  the  wintry  coasts 
and  unbroken  forests  of  the  New  England  shore. 

Under  such  perils  and  difficulties,  did  the  Pilgrim  Fathers 
commence  their  wanderings.  Another  summer,  and  the  hus- 
bands and  wives  and  children,  were  gathered  together  in  Hol- 
land, where  they  could  worship  God  in  peace. 


XL 


THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA. 

Question  of  Removal.  Meeting  for  Deliberation.  Guiana.  Application 
to  the  King.  The  Arrangements.  Farewell  Meeting.  Parting  at  Delft- 
Haven.  The  Departure.  The  Mayflower  upon  the  Ocean.  The  Com- 
pact. Provincetown  Harbor.  Landing  at  Plymouth. 

.THE  Pilgrims,  now  arrived  in  the  Low  Countries,  found  them- 
selves strangers  and  homeless  in  a  strange  land.  The  language, 
the  customs,  the  dress,  the  employments  of  the  people, — all 
were  strange.  The  scanty  resources  of  the  Pilgrims  having 
been  much  diminished  by  disadvantageous  sales,  by  the  plun- 
dering? of  their  persecutors,  and  by  the  expenses  of  their  em- 
barkation and  voyage,  they  found  immediate  need  of  their  best 
foresight  and  endeavor,  to  sustain  themselves  and  their  children. 
"  For,"  says  Bradford,  "  though  they  saw  fair  and  beautiful  cities 
flowing  with  abundance  of  all  sorts  of  wealth  and  riches,  yet  it 
was  not  long  before  they  saw  the  grim  and  grizzled  face  of 
poverty  coming  on  them  like  an  armed  man,  with  whom  they 
must  encounter,  and  from  whom  they  could  not  flee." 

But  even  then,  religion  and  Heaven  were  uppermost  in  their 
minds.  These  were  the  difficulties  which  they  had  looked  in 
the  face  from  the  beginning  ;  and  when  the  trial  came  they  were 
neither  disappointed  nor  dismayed. 

Findingtheir  brethren  of  the  Churches,  of  Johnson,  Ainsworth, 
and  Smith,  who  had  come  out  before  them,  now  fallen  into 
unhappy  disputes  at  Amsterdam,  where  the  Pilgrim  Church 
came  first  to  sojourn  ;  they  thought  it  best  to  remove  be- 
fore they  were  any  way  engaged  in  these  dissensions.  They 
removed  to  Leyden,  "  a  fair  and  beautiful  city,"  says  Bradford, 
"  and  a  sweet  situation  ;  but  wanting  in  that  traffic  by  sea  which 
Amsterdam  enjoyed,  it  was  not  so  beneficial  for  their  outward 
means  of  living  and  estates."  *  *  *  "  Being  now  here 
pitched,  they  fell  to  such  trades  and  employments  as  they  best 
could ;  valuing  peace  and  their  spiritual  comfort  above  any 


154  THE   PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

riches  whatsoever ;  and  at  length  they  came  to  raise  a  compe- 
tent and  comfortable  living,  with  hard  and  continual  labor." 

Bradford,  the  future  Governor  of  Plymouth  Colony,  bound 
himself  apprentice  to  a  silk-dyer.  Brewster  became  a  teacher, 
and  afterwards  a  printer ;  giving  to  the  world  such  books  as  the 
press  was  not  allowed  to  strike  off  in  England.  "Being  thus 
settled,''  says  Bradford,  "  they  continued  many  years  in  a  com- 
fortable condition,  enjoying  much  sweet  and  delightful  society." 
*  *  *  "  And  many  came  unto  them  from  divers  parts  of 
England,  so  as  they  grew  a  great  congregation."*  The  number 
of  communicants  in  the  Church  appears  to  have  been  about  300. 
"  Never,"  said  the  magistrates  of  the  city,  after  these  people  had 
continued  among  them  for  ten  years,  "  Never  did  we  have  any 
suit  or  accusation  against  any  of  them."  "  Such  was  the  humble 
zeal  and  fervent  love  of  this  people  towards  God  and  his  ways," 
says  Bradford,  "  that  they  seemed  to  come  surprisingly  near  the 
primitive  pattern  of  the  first  Churches."  *  *  *  "  They  lived 
together  in  love  and  peace  all  their  days,  without  any  considera- 
ble differences,  or  any  disturbances  that  grew  thereby,  but  such 
as  was  easily  healed  in  love;  and  so  they  continued,  until  by 
mutual  consent  they  removed  into  New  England." 

It  was  in  the  year  1617  that  the  Pilgrims  began  to  discuss  the 
question  of  removing  to  America.  The  thought  originated  with 
Robinson  and  Brewster  ;  who,  after  mature  deliberation,  imparted 
their  thoughts  to  other  members  of  the  congregation.!  Bradford 
and  Winslow,  who  both  participated  in  these  deliberations,  have 
set  down  the  reasons  which  weighed  for  this  removal.  The 
country  was  hard ;  many  had  spent  their  estates  and  had  been 
forced  to  return  to  England.  Most  of  them  were  in  adult  life, 
and  some  far  advanced  in  years  when  they  were  driven  from 
home  by  persecution  ;  and  now  "  old  age  began  to  come  on  some 
of  them."  "  Many  of  their  children,"  says  Bradford,  "  that  were 
of  the  best  dispositions  and  gracious  inclinations,  having  learned 
to  bear  the  yoke  in  their  youth,  and  willing  to  bear  part  of  their 
parents'  burden,  were  oftentimes  so  oppressed  with  their  heavy 
labors,  that  although  their  minds  were  free  and  willing,  yet  their 
bodies  bowed  down  under  the  weight  of  the  same,  and  became 
decrepit  in  their  very  youth."  But  the  prevalent  licentiousness 
of  the  youth  around  them,  the  numerous  temptations  and  evil 
examples  of  the  place,  were  sources  of  great  apprehension  to  the 
Pilgrims.  "  Some  became  soldiers  ;  others  took  upon  them  far 
voyages  by  sea,  and  others  some  worse  courses  tending  to  disso- 
luteness and  danger  of  their  souls."  The  Sabbath  was  almost 
universally  profaned  in  Holland.  This  was  a  great  grief  to  the 
Pilgrims,  and  a  snare  to  their  children.  They  were  loth  that 
*  Bradford  in  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims.  t  Winslow. 


THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA.  155 

their  posterity  should  live  under  any  other  government  than  that 
of  England.  "  Lastly,"  says  Gov.  Bradford,  "  (and  that  was  not 
least)  a  great  hope  and  inward  zeal  they  had  of  laying  some 
good  foundations,  or  at  least  to  make  some  way  thereunto,  for 
the  propagating  and  advancing  the  Gospel  of  the  kingdom  of 
Christ  in  these  remote  parts  of  the  world,  "  tliougli  they  should,  be 
as  stepping-stones  unto  others  for  performing  so  great  a  work" 

Well  were  these  reasons  for  removal  weighed.  Well  were  the 
dangers  considered.  The  Pilgrims  were  now  in  mature  life, 
when  the  rashness  of  enterprise,  if  not  enterprise  itself,  begins  to 
decline.  They  had  had  experience  of  hardships  ;  and  if  perse- 
cution may  be  supposed  to  kindle  up  a  resolute  enthusiasm, 
they  had  now  been  settled  in  quietness  for  eight  years.  It  was 
sober  judgment,  religious  principle,  and  prudent  forecast,  laying 
plans  for  the  building  up  of  Christ's  kingdom  unfettered  and  free 
in  the  wilderness  of  the  New  World.  Advanced  in  years  as  the 
Pilgrims  were,  they  could  not  expect  to  enjoy  the  comforts  of 
life,  or  to  behold  anything  beyond  the  first  beginnings  of  a  new 
settlement,  alone  and  unsupported  on  a  distant  wilderness  shore. 
They  lived  FOR  CHRIST  AND  FOR  THEIR  POSTERITY. 

The  project  of  a  removal  to  America  was  made  public  for  the 
scanning  of  all.  Some,  full  of  hope,  dwelt  upon  the  brighter 
aspects  of  the  enterprise.  Others,  as  caution  or  despondency 
prompted,  thorght  of  the  hazards  and  dangers  of  the  scheme. 
They  dwelt  upon  the  casualties  of  the  seas ;  for,  at  that  time,  a 
voyage  across  the  Atlantic  was  not  like  a  voyage  of  the  present 
day.  They  alleged  the  weak  bodies  of  the  men  and  women, 
worn  out  with  age  and  labor;  the  miseries  of  a  wilderness  ;  the 
danger  of  famine  and  nakedness ;  the  changing  of  their  diet  and 
water,  as  likely  to  infect  their  bodies  with  weakness  or  disease  ; 
the  well  known  treachery  and  ferocity  of  the  savages ;  their  *'  de- 
light to  flay  men  alive  with  the  shells  of  fishes,  cutting  off  the 
limbs  by  piece-meal,  and  broiling  them  on  the  coals,  and  causing 
men  to  eat  the  collops  of  their  flesh  in  their  sight  while  they 
lived."  "  And  surely,"  says  Bradford,  "  it  could  not  be  thought 
but  the  hearing  of  these  things  could  not  but  move  the  bowels 
of  men  to  grate  within  them  and  tremble."  In  reply,  the  more 
courageous  answered,  That  all  great  and  honorable  actions  were 
always  accompanied  with  difficulties.  It  was  granted  that  the 
dangers  were  great,  but  not  desperate,  and  the  difficulties  many, 
but  not  invincible.  "  All,  through  the  help  of  God,  by  fortitude, 
might  either  be  borne  or  overcome."  Besides,  it  was  alleged, 
their  condition  was  not  ordinary  ;  they  were  now  only  in  exile, 
and  in  poor  condition  ;  as  great  miseries  might  befall  them  in 
their  present  residence  ;  the  twelve  years'  truce  were  now  out,  and 
nothing  was  to  be  heard  but  the  beating  of  drums  and  preparing 


156 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


for  war;  the  events  whereof  are  always  uncertain.      The  Span- 
iards might  prove  as  cruel  as  the  savages  of  America.* 

Having  freely  discussed  in  private,  the  subject  of  a  removal, 
the  congregation  at  length  set  apart  a  time  for  fasting  and  prayer 
for  the  Lord's  direction.  This  done,  they  came  together  for  sol- 
emn deliberation,  and  for  a  final  decision  of  this  great  affair. 

"  Some,  and  none  of  the  meanest,"  says  Bradford  (and  he  was 
one  of  that  important  council),  "  had  thoughts  and  were  earnest 
for  Guiana."  Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  a  few  years  before  this,  had 
written  a  description  of  that  country,  which  he  calls  "  a  mighty, 
rich,  and  beautiful  empire,  directly  east  from  Peru,  towards  the 
sea,  lying  under  the  equinoctial  line."  Its  capital  was  that  great 
golden  city  which  the  Spaniards  call  El  Dorado,  and  the  natives 
Manoa,  and  for  greatness,  riches,  and  excellent  seat,  it  far  exceed- 
eth  any  in  the  world."  Such  was  the  fabulous  El  Dorado  :  and 
in  that  age  of  discoveries,  things  wonderful  and  strange  had  be- 
come so  common,  that  nothing  was  too  extravagant  to  surpass 
belief.  Raleigh  had  sailed  up  the  Oronoco  400  miles  in  quest  of 
that  far-famed  city.  "  On  both  sides  of  this  river,"  said  he,  "  we 
passed  the  most  beautiful  country  that  mine  eyes  ever  beheld  ; 
plains  of  twenty  miles  in  length  ;  the  grass  short  and  green  ;  and 
in  divers  parts,  groves  of  trees  by  themselves,  as  if  they  had  been 
by  all  the  art  and  labor  of  the  world  so  made  of  purpose  ;  and 
still  as  we  rowed,  the  deer  came  down  feeding  by  the  water's 
side,  as  if  they  had  been  used  to  a  keeper's  call ;  *  *  *  The 
river  winding  into  divers  branches,  the  plains  adjoining  without 
bush  or  stubble ;  *  *  *  the  birds  towards  the  evening 
singing  on  every  tree  a  thousand  tunes,  the  air  fresh,  with  a  gen- 
tle easterly  wind  ;  and  every  stone  that  we  stopped  to  take  up, 
promised  either  gold  or  silver  by  his  complexion.  I  never  saw 
a  more  beautiful  country  nor  more  lively  prospects."! 

In  such  terms,  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  had  described  the  country 
of  Guiana.  Such  arguments  some  of  the  principal  men  urged, 
to  turn  the  thoughts  of  the  Pilgrims  to  these  sunny  and  fertile 
plains  of  the  south,  rather  than  to  the  wintry  hills  and  forests  of 
North  America.  But  the  wary  Pilgrims  saw  lurking  evils  under 
these  inviting  prospects.  They  thought  of  the  fierce  diseases  of 
a  sultry  clime.  The  English  nation  had  no  claim  to  these  re- 
gions. The  colonies  of  Spain  were  in  their  neighborhood  ;  and 

*  The  providence  of  God  is  to  be  remarked,  in  bringing  the  Pilgrims  to  Holland 
just  at  the  beginning  of  a  truce  of  twelve  years,  agreed  upon  after  a  war  of  more 
than  thirty  years  between  the  United  Provinces  and  Spain.  Just  when  that  truce 
•was  closing,  and  everywhere  was  the  beating  of  drums  and  preparations  for  war, 
the  Pilgrims,  having  now  had  time  to  establish  their  Church  Polity,  and  to  gather 
their  friends  and  resources  from  England,  were  led  across  the  ocean,  to  the  destiny 
which  God  had  appointed  them  to  fulfil. 

t  In  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,    p.  51. 


THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA.  157 

Spain  was  then  a  powerful  and  dreaded  nation — pre-eminent  in 
bigotry  and  fierce  intolerance. 

The  deliberation  ended  in  favor  of  the  Northern  parts  of  what 
was  then  called  Virginia.  Trusty  men  were  sent  over  to  Eng- 
land to  see  if  their  enterprise  might  find  favor  with  the  king  ;  and 
if  liberty  of  conscience  might  be  allowed. 

"  To  enlarge  my  dominions,"  said  King  James,  "  is  a  good 
and  honest  motion.  But  whence  may  profits  accrue  to  your- 
selves and  to  the  crown  ?"  "  From  the  fisheries  at  least,"  replied 
the  envoys.  "  So  God  have  my  soul,"  said  the  king,  with  his 
customary  profaneness,  "  'tis  an  honest  trade.  It  was  the  Apos- 
tles' own  calling."  But  King  James  would  give  them  no  further 
answer  than  to  refer  them  to  the  Bishops  of  Canterbury  and 
London.  The  envoys  chose  rather  to  rest  upon  his  majesty's 
first  indefinite  and  informal  approbation.  The  Virginia  Com- 
pany were  desirous  to  have  them  go,  and  willing  to  grant  them 
an  ample  charter;  but  no  persuasions  could  wring  a  consent 
from  the  king  that  they  might  be  allowed  liberty  of  religion, 
and  have  it  secured  under  the  great  seal.  The  king  allowed 
them  to  gather  from  his  discour3e,  that  he  would  not  molest  them 
in  the  exercise  of  their  religion,  but  he  would  grant  nothing 
further.  The  more  sagacious  concluded  it  best  to  act  upon  the 
king's  implied  promise  that  he  would  not  molest  them  ;  for,  said 
they,  if  the  king  should  hereafter  take  it  into  his  head  to  trouble 
us,  it  would  be  no  security  if  \ve  had  his  seal  "  as  broad  as  the 
barn-floor.  He  would  make  pretexts  ;  he  would  devise  ways 
enough  to  re-call  or  reverse  it."  "  We  must  rest  on  God's 
providence." 

"  At  the  very  time  that  this  negotiation  was  pending,  the  king 
issued  his  declaration  requiring  the  Bishop  of  Lancashire  to 
constrain  all  the  Puritans  within  his  diocese  to  conform  or  leave 
the  country."* 

After  many  delays  and  discouragements,  which  tried  the 
patience  of  the  Pilgrims,  and  shook  off  many  uncertain  friends, 
a  patent  was  obtained  of  the  Virginia  Company  ;  which,  though 
it  cost  much,  was  afterwards  of  no  use.  Many  of  the  Church  at 
Leyden  were  too  poor  to  defray  the  expenses  of  the  voyage  ;  and 
the  means  of  all  united  were  inadequate  to  obtain  ships  and 
procure  the  necessary  outfit.  They  were  compelled  to  form  a 
sort  of  partnership  with  a  company  of  merchant  adventurers  for 
a  term  of  seven  years;  each  one  having  a  share  according  to  the 
stock  which  he  was  able  to  contribute  ;  and  the  person  of  each 
emigrant  above  16  years  to  be  rated  at  d£10. 

The  patent,  and  the  conditions  of  this  agreement,  being  sent 
over  to  the  people  for  their  consideration,  the  Church  now 

*  Prince. 


158  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

held  a  solemn  meeting,  and  observed  a  day  of  fasting  and  prayer. 
Under  their  trying  circumstances,  Mr.  Robinson  preached  from 
the  text,  "  And  David's  men  said  unto  him,  see,  we  be  afraid  here 
in  Judah  ;  how  much  more  if  we  come  to  Keilah  against  the  host 
of  the  Philistines?  Then  David  asked  counsel  of  the  Lord" 
Strengthened  and  encouraged  by  their  pastor's  words,  they 
decided  to  go.  It  was  concluded  that  part  of  the  church  should 
go  first ;  and  that  such  of  the  youngest  part  should  go  as  might 
freely  offer  themselves.  .  If  the  majority  should  go,  the  pastor 
was  to  go  with  them ;  if  not,  then  the  elder  only.  If  the  Lord 
should  frown  upon  the  enterprise,  "then  those  that  went  [were] 
to  return,  and  the  brethren  that  remained  still  here  to  assist  and 
be  helpful  to  them  ;  but  if  God  should  be  pleased  to  favor  them 
that  went,  then  they  also  should  endeavor  to  help  such  as  were 
here,  poor  and  ancient,  and  willing  to  come.'-*  "  Those  who 
go,"  says  Bradford,  "to  be  an  absolute  Church  by  themselves; 
as  well  as  those  who  should  stay  ;  with  this  proviso,  that  as 
any  go  over  and  return,  they  should  be  reputed  as  members  with- 
out further  dismission  or  testimonial ;  and  those  who  tarry,  to 
follow  the  rest  as  soon  as  they  can." 

Two  trusty  men  were  now  sent — Mr.  Cushman,  to  London, 
and  Mr.  Carver,  to  Southampton — to  make  arrangements. 
"  Those  who  were  to  go  first,  prepare  with  all  speed  ;  sell  their 
estates ;  put  their  money  into  the  common  stock  to  furnish  the 
supplies  for  the  company;  they  cease  from  their  ordinary  busi- 
ness ;  they  employ  themselves  with  diligence  in  making  the 
preparations  for  so  great  a  work."  When  all  is  nearly  ready  on 
their  part,  some  on  whom  they  relied  in  England  disappoint 
them.  Some  would  do  nothing  unless  they  would  go  to  Vir- 
ginia. Others  were  dissatisfied  that  they  went  not  to  Guiana. 
Some  of  the  merchants,  who  had  proffered  to  adventure  their 
money,  "  withdrew  and  pretended  many  excuses."  "  In  the 
midst  of  these  difficulties,"  says  Bradford,  "  they  of  Leyden  were 
drawn  to  great  straits."  The  season  had  advanced  to  June. 
On  the  4th,  Mr.  Robinson  wrote  to  Mr.  Carver,  complaining  of 
the  neglect  of  Mr.  Weston,  the  merchant  adventurer,  in  not  get- 
ting shipping  as  he  had  engaged.  In  another  week  the  Leyden 
people  were  encouraged  by  the  coming  of  their  pilot.  Mr. 
Cushman  writes  that  he  is  getting  a  ship,  and  hopes  all  will  be 
ready  in  fourteen  days.  The  Pilgrims  hasten  their  preparation. 
A  small  ship  of  sixty  tons  (in  size  like  one  of  our  coasting  packet 
sloops)  is  provided  in  Holland.  Another  of  180  tons  is  hired  in 
London,  and  in  these  the  Pilgrim  Church  with  their  children, 
and  all  their  supplies,  and  means  of  defence  for  founding  a  colony 
in  a  wilderness  remote  from  all  human  aid,  are  to  cross  the 

ocean ! 

*  Winslow. 


THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA.  159 

"  So  being  ready  to  depart,"  says  Bradford,  "they  had  a  day 
of  solemn  humiliation;  their  pastor  taking  his  text  from  Ezra,  viii. 
21.  '  Then  I  proclaimed  a  fast  there,  at  the  river  Ahava,  that  we 
might  afflict  ourselves  before  God,  to  seek  of  him  a  right  way  for 
us,  and  for  our  little  ones,  and  for  our  substance?  The  rest  of 
the  time  was  spent  in  pouring  out  prayers  to  the  Lord  with  great 
fervency,  mixed  with  abundance  of  tears."* 

Their  pastor  gave  them  his  farewell  advice.  "  We  are  now 
ere  long,"  said  he,  "  to  part  asunder,  and  the  Lord  knoweth 
whether  we  shall  ever  live  to  see  each  other's  faces  again.  *  *  * 
I  charge  you  before  God  and  his  blessed  angels,  to  follow  me  no 
further  than  I  have  followed  Christ.  If  God  shall  reveal  any- 
thing to  you  by  any  other  instrument,  be  as  ready  to  receive  it 
as  ever  you  were  to  receive  any  truth  by  my  ministry.  I  am 
very  confident  that  the  Lord  has  more  truth  and  light  to  break 
forth  out  of  his  holy  Word."  "  He  took  occasion,"  says  Win- 
slow,  "  to  bewail  the  state  and  condition  of  the  Reformed 
Churches,  who  were  come  to  a  period  "in  religion,  and  would  go 
no  further  than  the  instruments  of  their  Reformation  ;  *  *  * 
the  Lutherans  could  not  be  drawn  to  go  beyond  what  Luther 
said  *  *  *  the  Calvinists  stick  where  he  left  them  :  a  misery 
much  to  be  lamented  ;  for  though  these  men  were  precious  and 
shining  lights  in  their  times,  yet  God  hath  not  revealed  his 
whole  will  to  them  ;  and  were  they  now  living  they  would  be  as 
ready  to  embrace  further  light  as  that  which  they  had  received." 
He  put  the  Pilgrims  in  mind  of  their  covenant,  "  to  receive  what- 
soever light  or  truth  shall  be  made  known  from  his  written 
Word  ;  but  exhorted  us  to  take  heed  what  we  received  for  truth, 
and  well  to  examine  and  compare  it,  and  weigh  it  with  other 
Scriptures  of  truth  before  we  received  it.  For,  saith  he,  it  is 
not  possible  that  the  Christian  world  should  come  so  lately  out 
of  such  thick  antichristian  darkness,  and  that  full  perfection  of 
knowledge  should  break  forth  at  once."  "  Words,"  says  Prince, 
"  almost  astonishing  in  that  age  of  low  and  universal  bigotry 
which  then  prevailed  in  the  English  nation ;  wherein  this  truly 
great  and  learned  man,  seems  to  be  the  only  divine  who  was 
capable  of  rising  into  a  noble  freedom  of  thinking  and  practising 
in  religious  matters,  and  even  of  urging  such  an  equal  liberty  on 
his  own  people."f 

*  In  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,  p.  87. 

t  This  has  ever  been  the  great  principle  of  Puritanism  :  that  God's  Word  is  the 
sole  and  sufficient  standard  of  faith  and  duly.  Nearly  a  century  after  the  landing 
of  the  Pilgrims,  an  assembly  of  Connecticut  ministers,  in  setting  forth  their  general 
assent  to  the  Savoy  Confession  of  Faith,  as  containing  the  system  of  doctrine  which 
they  embraced,— deemed  it  important  to  preface  that  act  and  confession  with  these 
words,  worthy  to  be  written  in  broad  letters  of  living  light.  "  We  do  not  assume  to 
ourselves  that  anything  is  to  be  taken  upon  trust  from  us,  but  commend  to  our 
people  the  following  counsels :  1.  That  you  be  immoveably  and  unchangeably 


160  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

The  advice  of  the  pastor  being  given,  and  their  clothing  and 
effects  being  packed  and  in  readiness,  they  turn  their  thoughts  to 
their  departure.  "And  when  the  ship  was  ready  to  carry  us 
away,"  says  Winslow  (the  future  governor  of  the  colony,  but 
now  a  young  man  of  26  years),  "the  brethren  that  stayed  having 
again  solemnly  sought  the  Lord  with  us  and  for  us,  and  we  fur- 
ther engaging  ourselves  mutually  as  before;  they  that  stayed  at 
Leyden  feasted  us  that  were  to  go,  at  our  pastor's  house,  being 
large  ;  where  we  refreshed  ourselves,  after  tears,  with  singing  of 
psalms,  making  joyful  melody  in  our  hearts  as  well  as  with  the 
voice ;  there  being  many  of  the  congregation  very  expert  in  mu- 
sic :  and  indeed  it  was  the  sweetest  melody  that  mine  ears  ever 
heard." 

"  And  now,"  says  Bradford,  "  the  time  being  come  that  they 
must  depart,  they  were  accompanied  with  the  most  of  their 
brethren  out  of  the  city  unto  a  town  sundry  miles  off,  called 
DELFT-HAVEN  [24  miles  south  of  Leyden],  "where  the  ship 
lay  ready  to  receive  them.  So  they  left  that  goodly  and  pleasant 
city  which  had  been  their  resting-place  nearly  twelve  years  ;  BUT 
THEY  KNEW  THEY  WERE  PILGRIMS,  and  looked  not  much  on 
these  things,  but  lifted  up  their  eyes  to  Heaven,  their  dearest 
country,  and  quieted  their  spirits."  *  *  u  When  they  came  to 
the  place  they  found  the  ship  and  all  things  ready;  and  such  of 
their  friends  as  could  not  come  with  them  followed  after  them  ; 
and  sundry  came  also  from  Amsterdam  to  see  them  shipped,  and 
to  take  their  leave  of  them.  That  night  was  spent  with  little 
sleep  by  the  most,  but  with  friendly  entertainment  and  Christian 
discourse."  *  *  "  The  next  day  [July  22,  1620],  the  wind 
being  fair,  they  went  on  board,  and  their  friends  with  them  ;  when 
truly  doleful  was  the  sight  of  that  sad  and  mournful  parting;  to 
see  what  sighs,  and  sobs,  and  prayers,  did  sound  amongst  them ; 
what  tears  did  gush  from  every  eye  ;  and  pithy  speeches  pierced 
each  other's  heart;  that  sundry  of  the  Dutch  strangers  could  not 
refrain  from  tears.  Yet  comfortable  and  sweet  it  was  to  see  such 
lively  and  true  expressions  of  dear  and  unfeigned  love.  But  the 
tide  which  stays  for  no  man,  calling  them  away  that  were  loth  to 
depart,  their  reverend  pastor  falling  down  on  his  knees,  and  they 
all  with  him,  with  watery  cheeks  commended  them  with  most 
fervent  prayer  to  the  Lord  for  his  blessing:  and  then  with  mu- 
tual embraces  and  many  tears,  they  took  their  leave  of  one 
another." 

agreed  in  the  only  sufficient  and  invariable  rule  of  religion,  which  is  THE  HOLY  SCRIP- 
TURE, the  fixed  canon,  incapable  of  addition  or  diminution.  You  ought  to  account 
nothing  ancient  lhat  will  not  stand  by  this  rule  •  and  nothing  new  that  will.  2.  That 
you  be  determined  by  1his  rule  in  the  whole  of  religion.  That  your  faith  be  right 
and  divine,  the  Word  of  God  must  be  the  foundation  of  it,  and  the  authority  of  the 
Word  the  reason  of  it." 


THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA.  161 

I  avow  it ;  there  is  no  other  scene  in  the  history  of  man,  in 
which  mere  human  beings  and  uninspired  men  were  the  actors, 
on  which  my  eyes  would  gaze  with  so  much  interest — could  any 
past  scene  be  recalled  : — "  That  memorable  parting  at  Delft- Ha- 
ven ! "  What  men  and  women,  with  their  children,  the  hope  of 
their  future  country,  were  there !  For  what  principles  were  they 
exiles  from  their  native  land !  What  principles,  what  institu- 
tions are  they  about  to  carry  into  the  New  World !  It  is  one  of 
the  great  epochs  in  the  course  of  time.  What  changes  are  to 
come  over  the  face-  of  the  whole  world  !  what  revolutions  in  the 
principles  of  human  government,  and  in  the  prevalent  views  of 
human  rights  !  How  auspicious  that  day  for  the  divine  light  and 
freedom  of  God's  Holy  Word,  and  for  the  freedom  and  happi- 
ness of  mankind  !  Strike  from  the  pages  of  history  the  achieve- 
ments of  an  Alexander  or  a  Caesar,  or  blot  out  the  very  exist- 
ence of  empires  that  have  swayed  the  world  for  centuries  in  their 
turn — and  comparatively  little  is  lost.  But  blot  out  of  existence 
that  band  of  Pilgrims  at  Delft-Haven,  with  the  principles  for 
which  they  have  suffered,  and  what  they  are  going  to  plant  in 
the  American  wilderness, — and  alas!  what  desolation,  what 
darkness  broods  over  the  destinies  of  man  ! 

The  youthful  Winslow  adds  some  touches  which  the  more 
ancient  Bradford  saw  not  fit  to  add  to  the  picture.  The  prayer 
being  over,  "  A  flood  of  tears  was  poured  out,  but  we  were  not 
able  to  speak  one  to  another  for  the  abundance  of  sorrow."  *  * 
"  The  ship  ready  to  sail,  the  wind  being  fair,  we  gave  them  a 
volley  of  small  shot,  and  three  pieces  of  ordnance ;  and  so  lift- 
ing up  our  hands  to  each  other,  and  our  hearts  for  each  other  to 
the  Lord  our  God,  we  departed." 

A  prosperous  wind  carries  them  to  Southampton,  where  thqy 
find  "  the  bigger  ship  come  from  London,  lying  ready  with  all 
the  rest  of  their  company." 

And  now  all  things  being  prepared,  the  company  is  called  to- 
gether to  hear  a  letter  which  Mr.  Robinson  had  sent  after  them. 
"  Then  they  ordered  and  distributed  their  company  for  either 
ship  ;  chose  a  governor  and  two  or  three  assistants  for  each  ship 
to  order  the  people  by  the  way,  and  to  see  to  the  disposing  of 
their  provisions,  and  such  like  affairs."  Which  being  done,  on 
the  5th  of  August  they  set  sail. 

Unexpected  delays  had  already  protracted  the  time  of  their 
departure  until  it  was  too  late  for  the  comfortable  beginning  of 
a  settlement  on  a  wilderness  shore.  Now  further  delays  awaited 
them.  The  master  of  the  Speedwell  (the  smaller  vessel)  corn- 
plained  that  his  ship  was  so  leaky  that  he  durst  not  put  further 
to  sea.  Both  ships  were  forced  to  return  ;  and  on  the  eighth  day 
after  leaving  port  they  put  into  Dartmouth,  when  the  Speedwell 


162  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

was  searched  and  repaired.  They  had  not  sailed  again  more 
than  a  hundred  leagues,  before  Reynold*,  the  master  of  the  Speed- 
well, complained  that  his  ship  was  so  leaky  that  he  feared  that 
he  should  founder  in  the  sea  if  he  held  on.  Both  ships  put  back 
and  went  into  Plymouth.  The  Speedwell  was  searched  again, 
but  no  great  matter  appearing,  the  difficulty  was  judged  to  be 
a  general  weakness  of  the  ship.  "  The  ship  afterwards  made 
divers  profitable  and  successful  voyages,"  some  alteration  having 
been  made  in  her  masts.  The  truth  was,  that  the  master  and 
crew  were  under  contract  to  stay  a  year  in  America  ;  but  fearing 
the  want  of  provisions  and  other  perils  of  the  adventure,  "  they 
plotted  this  stratagem,"  says  Bradford,  "  to  free  themselves ;  as 
was  afterwards  known,  and  by  some  of  them  confessed." 

"  These  things  falling  out,  it  was  resolved  by  the  whole  com- 
pany to  dismiss  the  lesser  ship  and  part  of  the  company  with  her; 
and  that  the  other  part  of  the  company  should  proceed  in  the 
bigger  ship."  And  now,  after  another  sad  parting,  on  the  6th  of 
September,  the  Speedwell  returns  to  London,  and  the  Mayflower, 
with  her  precious  freight,  turns  her  prow  to  the  ocean.  For  a 
time  the  winds  are  fair,  and  bear  them  rapidly  forward.  Then 
contrary  winds  meet  them  :  then  fierce  storms.  The  upper 
works  of  the  ship  are  shattered,  and  leak  badly ;  one  of  the  main 
beams  of  the  midship  is  bent  and  cracked ;  and  the  ship  seems 
in  peril  of  being  crushed  by  the  waves.  The  seamen  and  pas- 
sengers hold  a  consultation  whether  to  return  or  hold  on.  Provi- 
dence has  ordered  it  that  one  of  the  passengers  has  brought  with 
him  a  large  screw  out  of  Holland.  With  that  screw  they  bring 
the  beam  into  its  place,  where  it  is  secured  by  the  carpenter,  and 
the  ship  appearing  strong  under  water,  they  hold  on  their  voyage. 
A  succession  of  storms  comes  upon  them.  For  days  together 
the  ship  is  unable  to  bear  a  sail ;  and  is  tossed  and  driven  at  the 
mercy  of  the  tempests.  Two  months  pass  away,  and  they  are 
yet  upon  the  deep.  The  chill  winds  of  coming  winter  give  them 
sad  tokens  of  what  they  are  to  expect  upon  a  bleak  and  houseless 
shore.  At  length  on  the  9th  of  November,  the  cry  of  LAND  is 
heard.  It  proves  to  be  the  extremity  of  Cape  Cod  ;  while  their 
destination  is  in  the  vicinity  of  the  Hudson.  They  alter  their 
course,  and  stand  to  the  southward.  But  they  are  on  an  un- 
known coast.  The  wintry  wind,  veering,  baffling,  and  stormy, 
beats  upon  them.  Twelve  hours  more,  and  they  are  entangled 
in  shoals  and  breakers.  The  wind  begins  to  fail  them.  The 
peril  becomes  imminent.  They  hold  a  consultation  what  to  do, 
and  bear  up  again  for  the  Cape. 

And  now,  while  the  ship  is  standing  northward  along  the 
Cape,  the  Pilgrims  draw  up  and  sign  a  covenant,  by  which  they 
combine  themselves  into  a  "  civil  body  politic,"  to  enact,  consti- 
tute and  frame  such  equal  laws,  ordinances,  acts,  constitutions 


THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA.  163 

and  officers,  from  time  to  time,  as  shall  be  thought  most  meet 
and  convenient  for  the  general  good  of  the  colony  ;  unto  which 
they  promised  all  due  submission  and  obedience."  It  was  the 
first  social  compact  in  the  world,  entered  into  by  freemen  pre- 
serving the  liberties  of  each,  and  guaranteeing  to  all  equal  privi- 
leges and  rights.  It  was  the  germ  of  the  first  true  republic  on 
earth.  The  great  idea,  so  novel,  so  startling  to  the  world,  so 
directly  opposed  to  the  divine  right  of  kings  and  prelates,  under 
whose  sway  the  world  had  so  long  groaned  in  bondage ;  the 
great  idea  of  such  a  republic,  as  founded  in  the  nature  and 
inalienable  rights  of  man,  the  Pilgrims  derived  from  the  Gospel 
scheme  of  a  Christian  Church.  A  congregational  Church  was 
the  original  and  model  of  American  Republicanism  ;  and  for  this 
stupendous  discovery,  which  is  now  so  simple  that  we  wonder 
it  could  ever  have  been  overlooked,  we  are  wholly  indebted  to 
the  diligent  search  which  the  Puritans  made  into  the  great  prin- 
ciples of  the  rights  of  conscience,  and  into  the  true  scriptural 
model  of  a  Christian  Church.  That  memorable  transaction,  in 
the  cabin  of  the  Mayflower,  arose  from  no  sudden  effort  of 
genius,  and  from  no  amazing  reach  of  political  sagacity ;  it  was 
only  the  practical  and  natural  carrying  out  of  principles  which 
had  long  been  canvassed,  and  which  had  become  in  the  minds 
of  the  Pilgrims  settled  and  undoubted  truths.  It  was  the  form 
of  government  which  it  was  well  understood  they  should  adopt,, 
before  they  sailed  from  Holland.  For  eighteen  years  they  had 
tried  the  experiment  in  their  republican  Church  ;  and  so  well 
were  they  satisfied,  that  they  could  never  resort  to  any  other  con- 
stitution of  government.  These  things  Mr.  Robinson  alludes  to 
as  understood  and  settled,  in  the  letter  which  he  sent  after  them 
to  Southampton.  He  speaks  of  their  "  design  to  become  a  body 
politic  using  civil  government;"  and  exhorts  them  to  orderly 
submission  to  such  government  from  the  consideration  that  it  is 
God's  ordinance,  and  that  they  "  are  to  have  only  them  for  their 
governors,  which  they  themselves  should  make  choice  of"  Nor 
did  the  Pilgrims  at  first  contemplate  forming  a  written  compact ; 
they  seemed  to  take  it  for  granted,  that  joining  the  community 
under  such  circumstances,  imposed,  on  every  one  so  joining,  a 
sufficient  bond  ;  and  that  God  had  naturally  given  to  everjgcom- 
munity  so  circumstanced,  authority  to  institute  government, 
which,  whenever  duly  established,  should  be  one  of  the  "  Powers 
ordained  of  God ;"  and  not  dependent  on  the  consent  of  every 
individual  to  bind  him  to  its  laws.  The  occasion  for  making 
the  compact,  was  that  "  they  observe  some  who  were  not  well 
affected  to  unity  and  concord,  but  who  gave  some  appearance 
of  faction."  It  was  thought  good,  therefore,  that  there  should  be 
an  association  and  agreement. 

The  compact  being  signed,  the  Mayflower  was  now  winding 


164  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

her  way  around  the  extremity  of  Cape  Cod ;  and  on  the  llth  of 
November,  she  cast  her  anchor  in  what  is  now  Provincetown,  or 
Cape  Cod  harbor. 

"  Being  now  passed  the  vast  ocean,  and  a  sea  of  trouble," 
says  one  who  then  stood  upon  the  deck  of  the  Mayflower,  "be- 
fore their  preparation  unto  further  proceedings,  as  to  seek  a  place 
of  habitation,  &c.,  they  fell  down  upon  their  knees  and  blessed 
the  Lord,  the  God  of  Heaven,  who  had  brought  them  over  the 
vast  and  furious  ocean,  and  delivered  them  from  all  perils  and 
miseries  thereof,  again  to  set  their  feet  on  the  firm  and  stable 
earth."  The  same  day,  some  fifteen  or  sixteen  men,  well  armed, 
were  sent  with  others  to  fetch  wood,  for  the  Pilgrims  had  none 
left,  and  to  see  to  what  sort  of  land  they  had  come.  They  returned 
at  night,  having  discovered  no  person  or  habitation  ;  but  with 
"  their  boat  loaded  with  juniper,  which  smelled  very  sweet  and 
strong,  and  which  they  burnt  most  of  the  time  they  lay  there." 

The  next  day  was  the  Sabbath,  and  all  remained  quietly  on 
board. 

On  Monday,  the  13th  of  November,  they  unshipped  their  shal- 
lop to  mend  and  repair  her  ;  having  been  forced  to  cut  her  down 
in  stowing  her  betwixt  decks ;  and  "  she  having  become  much 
opened  with  the  people's  lying  in  her."  Seventeen  days  were 
passed  away  while  the  carpenter  was  completing  this  indispen- 
sable work.  In  the  mean  time  the  people  by  turns  went  on 
shore  to  refresh  themselves,  "  and  the  women  to  wash,  as  they 
had  great  need."  The  ship  had  not  been  able  to  come  nearer 
than  three-fourths  of  a  mile  to  the  shore;  and  the  shallows  com- 
pelled the  people  "  to  wade  a  bow-shot  or  two  in  going  to  land," 
"  which  caused  many  to  get  colds  and  coughs,  for  many  times  it 
was  freezing  cold  weather." 

In  the  meantime  sixteen  men,  every  one  with  his  musket, 
sword,  and  corslet,  under  the  conduct  of  Capt.  Miles  Standish, 
set  out  to  explore  the  country.  On  the  27th  of  November,  their 
shallop  and  long-boat  being  repaired,  another  party  of  thirty  men 
in  the  shallop  and  long-boat  proceed  along  the  cape  to  a  greater 
distance.  Stormy  weather  drives  them  on  shore.  They  march 
over  hill?  and  through  valleys  and  deserts,  making  various  dis- 
coveries and  enduring  great  hardships  ;  but  everywhere  ihe  soil 
is  barren,  and  the  shore  too  shelving  for  a  convenient  harbor. 

On  the  6th  of  December,  the  third  exploring  party  set  oft'  from 
the  ship,  it  "  being  very  cold  and  bad  weather,"  and  several  being 
very  near  perishing  with  fatigue  and  cold,  ere  they  could  get 
clear  of  a  sandy  point  which  lay  within  a  furlong  from  the  ship. 
The  water  "  froze  on  their  coats,  and  made  them,"  says  their 
journal,  "like  coats  of  iron."  After  various  adventures,  passing 
through  storms  of  snow,  and  over  rough  seas,  and  being  nearly 
lost  on  breakers,  they  are  driven  into  a  "  fair  sound,"  where  they 


THE  VOYAGE  TO  AMERICA.  165 

"  get  under  the  lee  of  a  small  rise  of  land ;  but  are  divided 
about  going  ashore,  lest  they  should  ^fall  into  the  midst  of  sava- 
ges. Some,  therefore,  keep  the  boatj  but  others  being  so  wet, 
cold  and  feeble,  that  they  cannot  bear  it,  but  venture  ashore  with 
great  difficulty,  kindle  a  fire,  and  after  midnight,  the  wind  shift- 
ing to  the  north-west,  and  freezing  hard,  the  rest  are  glad  to  get 
to^them,  and  here  stay  the  night."  It  was  a  small  island  in 
Plymouth  bay,  to  which  Providence  had  now  directed  their 
course.  In  the  morning  they  explore  it  and  find  no  inhabitants. 
The  next  day  is  the  Sabbath ;  and  though  their  business  is 
so  pressing,  and  their  friends  awaiting  their  return  with  anxie- 
ty, and  though  winter  is  already  upon  them,  yet  there  they  KEEP 
THE  SABBATH.  The  next  day  they  explore  the  harbor  and  march 
into  the  land.  They  find  vacant  corn-fields,  little  running  brooks, 
a  good  harbor,  and  a  place  good  for  situation.  They  returned 
to  the  ship.  On  the  loth  of  December,  the  ship  weighs  anchor, 
to  proceed  to  the  place  of  settlement ;  but  stormy  weather  makes 
them  glad  to  return  once  more  to  the  shelter  of  the  cape.  On 
the  16th,  they  come  safe  into  the  harbor.  This  again  is  Satur- 
day, and  the  next  day  being  the  Sabbath,  they  remain  on  board 
and  keep  it  holy  unto  the  Lord.  On  Monday,  a  trusty  party 
land  for  further  exploration.  They  march  along  the  coast,  but 
see  not  an  Indian  nor  a  habitation.  At  night,  they  return  weary 
to  the  ship.  On  the  19th,  they  go  ashore  and  determine  to  fix 
upon  one  of  two  places.  In  the  morning  of  DEC.  20TH,  they  go 
ashore,  and  conclude  "by  most  voices,  to  set  in  the  main-land 
on  a  high  ground,  where  there  is  a  great  deal  of  land  cleared  and 
hath  been  planted  with  corn,  three  or  four  years  ago,  and  there  is 
a  very  sweet  brook  runs  under  the  hill-side,  and  many  delicate 
springs  of  as  good  water  as  can  be  drunk,  and  where  we  may 
harbor  our  shallop  exceeding  well."  The  next  day  it  was 
stormy,  and  those  on  board  could  not  go  ashore  ;  those  that  re- 
mained on  land  all  night,  "  could  do  nothing,  but  were  wet,  not 
having  daylight  sufficient  to  make  them  a  court  of  guard  to 
keep  them  dry."  "  All  that  night  it  blew  and  rained  extremely. 
It  was  so  tempestuous  that  the  shallop  could  not  go  on  land  so 
soon  as  was  meet,  for  they  had  no  victuals  on  land.  About  11 
o'clock,  the  shallop  went  off  with  much  ado,  with  provision,  but 
could  not  return.  Friday,  Dec.  22d,  the  storm  continued  so  that 
those  on  board  could  not  get  to  land.  On  the  23d,  so  many  as 
could,  went  on  shore  and  felled  timber  for  building.  On  Thurs- 
day the  28th,  they  went  to  work  on  a  hill  to  form  a  platform  for 
the  cannon  on  a  site  commanding  all  the  plain  and  bay;  and  be- 
gan to  measure  out  the  ground,  and  to  arrange  the  families.  It 
was  the  20th  of  Jan.,  before  they  made  up  their  shed  for  their 
common  goods:  and  on  the  21st  of  Jan.,  1621,  they  kept  their 
first  Sabbath  on  land. 


XII. 


THE  PILGRIMS  AT  PLYMOUTH, 


Apparent  designs  of  Providence.  Contrast  between  Popery  in  South 
America  and  Protestantism  in  the  North.  The  fruits  of  Puritanism  in 
New  England.  Sufferings  of  the  Pilgrims.  The  first  harvest.  The  first 
Thanksgiving.  New  settlers.  Famine.  Day  of  Fasting.  Return  of 
Plenty, 

LET  us  now  go  back  to  the  10th  day  of  November,  A.  D.  1620, 
when  the  Mayflower,  hardly  escaping  from  the  shoals  and  breakers 
in  her  attempted  passage  to  the  Hudson,  turns  her  course,  and  bears 
up  once  more  for  the  northern  extremity  of  the  cape.  An  eloquent 
orator  has  thus  drawn  the  picture.*  "  Let  us  go  up  in  imagina- 
tion to  yonder  hill,  and  look  out  upon  the  November  scene. 
That  single  dark  speck  just  discernible  through  the  perspective 
glass  on  the  waste  of  water,  is  the  fated  vessel.  The  storm  moans 
through  her  tattered  canvass,  as  she  creeps,  almost  sinking,  to  her 
anchorage  in  Provincetown  harbor;  and  there  she  lies  with  all 
her  treasures,  not  of  silver  and  gold  (for  of  these  she  had  none), 
but  of  courage,  of  patience,  of  zeal,  of  high  spiritual  daring.  So 
often  as  I  dwell  in  imagination  on  this  scene ;  when  I  consider 
the  condition  of  the  Mayflower,  utterly  incapable  as  she  was  of 
living  through  another  gale ;  when  I  survey  the  terrible  front  pre- 
sented by  our  coast  to  the  navigator,  who,  unacquainted  with  its 
channels  and  roadsteads,  should  approach  it  in  the  stormy  season, 
I  dare  not  call  it  a  piece  of  good  fortune  that  the  general  north 
and  south  wall  of  the  shore  of  New  England  should  be  broken 
by  this  extraordinary  projection  of  a  cape,  running  out  into  the 
ocean  a  hundred  miles,  as  if  on  purpose  to  receive  and  encircle 
the  precious  vessel.  As  I  now  see  her  freighted  with  the  desti- 
nies of  a  continent,  barely  escaped  from  the  perils  of  the  deep, 
approaching  the  shore  precisely  where  the  broad  sweep  of  this 
most  remarkable  headland  presents  almost  the  only  point,  where, 
for  hundreds  of  miles,  she  could  with  any  ease  have  made  a  har- 
bor, and  this,  perhaps,  the  very  best  on  the  seaboard,  I  feel  my 
spirit  raised  above  the  sphere  of  mere  natural  agencies.  I  see  the 

*  Hon.  Edward  Everett,  at  the  Cape  Cod  Centennial  Celebration,  1839. 


THE  PILGRIMS  AT  PLYMOUTH.  167 

mountains  of  New  England  rising  from  their  rocky  thrones. 
They  rush  forward  into  the  ocean,  settling  down  as  they  advance ; 
and  there  they  range  themselves,  a  mighty  bulwark  around  the 
heaven-directed  vessel.  Yes,  the  everlasting  God  himself  stretches 
out  the  arm  of  his  mercy  and  his  power,  in  substantial  manifes- 
tation, and  gathers  the  meek  company  of  his  worshippers  as  in 
the  hollow  of  his  hand." 

Their  course  was  indeed  heaven-directed.  Had  they  gone  to 
the  vicinity  of  the  Hudson,  they  must  have  been  involved  in  dif- 
ficulties with  the  settlers  owing  allegiance  to  another  nation,  or 
perhaps  have  been  reduced  under  their  power. 

These  were  the  men,  of  all  time,  the  best  fitted  by  peculiar  dis- 
cipline for  just  the  work  which  the  Providence  of  God  led  them 
to  accomplish.  They  had  been  taught  the  great  principles  of 
evangelical  truth  and  of  religious  freedom,  by  just  such  conflicts 
as  are  necessary  to  separate  the  truth  from  old  systems  of  abuse 
and  error.  By  long  continued  sufferings,  they  had  learned  to 
prize  these  principles  as  dearer  than  their  pleasant  homes  in 
England,  and  dearer  even  than  life.  For  the  truth,  for  freedom, 
for  their  posterity,  for  God,  they  had  come  with  their  wives  and 
little  ones  to  a  wilderness.  Far  from  all  human  aid,  with  all 
their  resources  in  themselves  and  God,  they  had  come  to  plant 
themselves  on  the  borders  of  that  interminable  forest,  whose  only 
sounds  were  the  deep  moaning  of  the  winds  through  the  branches 
that  cast  their  unbroken  shadows  over  a  continent;  save  as  at 
times  the  howlings  of  wild  beasts,  and  the  yells  of  savage  men 
gave  to  this  awful  loneliness  a  variety  of  terror.  After  a  long 
night  of  a  thousand  years  brooding  over  the  whole  world,  the 
Lord  had  effectually  brought  to  light  once  more  the  fundamental 
principles  of  his  Holy  Word.  When  lordly  prelates  joined  with 
the  civil  power  to  impose  ceremonials  and  forms  unfriendly  to  the 
truth  and  inconsistent  with  purity  of  worship,  then  the  Lord  led 
his  people  to  make  further  discoveries  of  the  principles  of  religious 
freedom.  He  suffered  those  in  spiritual  lordships  to  harden  their 
hearts,  till  by  grievous  persecutions  they  had  driven  the  subjects 
of  their  tyranny  to  a  clear  discernment  of  the  corruptions  and 
usurpations,  wrought  into  the  very  frame-work  of  the  Church 
organizations  and  civil  institutions  of  the  old  world.  As  there 
was  no  place  on  the  Eastern  continent  where  these  great  princi- 
ples might  develope  themselves,  and  show  their  beauty,  and  ma- 
ture their  fruits,  the  Lord  brought  this  people,  so  prepared,  into 
a  new  world.  He-  guided  them  to  an  accessible  haven.  He 
brought  them  into  a  void  space,  from  which  his  Providence  had 
just  swept  off  the  original  inhabitants  by  a  desolating  pestilence; 
thus  furnishing  fields  already  prepared,  and  removing  all  ene- 
mies from  their  immediate  borders.  By  bringing  the  adventur- 


168  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ers  into  a  rough  land  of  rocks  and  hills,  requiring  toil  and  fru- 
gality, and  securing  vigor  and  sagacity  to  its  cultivators,  the  Lord 
provided  for  the  future  sending  off  of  hardy  and  well  trained 
colonists,  to  the  wide  plains  and  the  fertile  banks  of  the  magnifi- 
cent rivers  of  the  west ;  of  adventurers  to  trade  in  every  mart  of 
commerce  throughout  the  land ;  and  of  mariners  to  spread  their 
sails  on  every  sea,  and  to  visit  every  portion  of  the  globe.  Thus 
was  provision  made  for  spreading  the  principles  of  the  Pilgrims 
throughout  the  land,  and  for  extending  their  influence  over  the 
world.  Can  any  one  fail  to  recognize  in  all  this  the  finger  of 
God  ?  Here  is  indeed  no  pillar  of  cloud  or  of  fire.  Yet  in  all 
these  events,  connected  with  their  great  results,  the  Providence  of 
God  declares  itself  as  if  in  broad  and  legible  lines ;  calling  upon 
us  to  recognize  His  hand  ;  and  encouraging  the  hope — if  we  for- 
sake not  the  God  of  our  fathers — that  He  has  yet  greater  designs 
to  accomplish,  and  yet  more  signal  mercies  to  bestow  upon  man- 
kind, as  the  ultimate  result  of  that  series  of  providences,  which 
planted  the  Pilgrims  in  this  American  land. 

O  what  emotions  often  fill  my  soul,  when,  on  the  very  soil  on 
which  the  early  fathers  of  New  England  trod,  arid  looking  abroad 
over  the  hills  and  waters  on  which  they  once  looked,  and  while 
walking  amid  their  graves,  I  think  of  the  hand  of  God  so  clearly 
revealed  ;  and  on  his  great  designs  in  bringing  such  a  race  of  men 
to  people  the  shores  of  this  great  continent!  What  other  people 
on  earth  can  point  to  such  an  ancestry  as  the  people  of  New 
England?  Who  else  are  under  such  obligations  to  truth,  to 
freedom,  and  to  God  ?  I  avow  it — my  soul  pities  those  who  for 
light  reasons,  and  for  the  most  part  without  examination,  have 
thrown  the  principles  of  such  fathers  away ;  and  who,  on  the 
principles  to  which  they  are  now  schooled  to  submit,  must  count 
those  fathers  fanatics,  misguided,  ignorant,  and  turbulent  men, 
rushing  into  a  sinful  schism  from  unworthy  motives,  and  for  an 
unworthy  cause  !  I  envy  not  those  who  must  now  blot  out 
these  fair  lines  of  God's  good  providence ;  who  must  regard  the 
reasons  which  led  the  Pilgrims  to  brave  the  ocean  and  the  wil- 
derness, as  unwarrantable  ;  their  landing  on  the  rock  of  Ply- 
mouth an  ill-omened  event ;  and  who  can  behold  nothing  in  all 
the  fruits  of  their  labors,  save  the  results  of  an  unhappy  and 
wicked  revolt  from  the  rich  blessings  and  lawful  rule  of  a  right- 
eous ecclesiastical  dominion !  Sure  I  am,  that  those  Pilgrims 
were  well  informed  and  godly  men.  Sure  I  am,  that  they 
examined  these  principles  with  a  patience  and  research  to  which 
the  present  age  is  well  nigh  a  stranger.  Were  Robinson  and 
his  compeers  alive ;  were  Cotton,  and  Shepard,  and  Elliot,  and 
multitudes  of  the  first  ministers  of  New  England  now  alive,  and 
in  our  midst, — there  are  no  ministers  of  religion  in  this  country 


THE   PILGRIMS  AT  PLYMOUTH.  169 

or  in  the  world,  who,  for  learning,  eloquence,  character,  or 
anything  that  adorns  humanity — could  pretend  to  be  their 
superiors.  The  results  of  their  labors  are  manifest  to  all  the 
world.  The  prelatic  system,  the  antagonist  to  theiis,  has  con- 
tinued to  reign  in  the  old  world,  as  it  had  already  reigned  for  a 
thousand  years.  The  Puritan  principles  came  with  a  small  band 
of  outcasts  into  a  desolate  wilderness.  Only  two  centuries  are 
elapsed  ;  but  take  the  history  of  those  two  hundred  years,  and 
tell  me  :  Which  of  these  two  systems  has  most  signalized  itself 
by  results  of  freedom  and  intelligence  ?  Which  has  done  most 
for  the  advancement  of  right  principles  ?  Which  has  done  most 
to  exalt  and  bless  the  people  who  have  embraced  it  ?  Nay,  take 
the  map  of  the  whole  world ;  open  the  history  of  all  time,  and 
lay  your  finger  on  the  spot  of  earth  exhibiting  the  greatest  com- 
parative amount  of  comfort,  of  enterprise,  of  piety,  and  of  every 
thing  that  conduces  to  the  exaltation  or  happiness  of  man.  Can 
you  hesitate  ?  Who  is  there  that  will  no.t  instantly  point  to  the 
rocks  and  hills  of  New  England  ;  whose  whole  surface  was,  two 
hundred  years  ago,  one  unbroken  forest?  Under  every  earthly 
disadvantage,  with  incredible  toil,  in  the  midst  of  appalling  dan- 
gers, obstructed  by  the  jealousy  of  the  mother  country,  and  at 
last  compelled  to  encounter  her  in  arms,  in  two  centuries  the 
people,  rich  in  nothing  save  the  principles  of  the  Pilgrims,  have 
turned  this  wilderness  into  a  fruitful  field  ;  and  made  it  the 
moral  garden  of  the  whole  world.  An  intelligent  Englishman,* 
famed  for  his  researches  in  science,  a  member  of  the  established 
Church,  and  one  who  by  his  extensive  travels  and  personal 
inspection  is  qualified  to  form  an  intelligent  judgment,  on  his 
return  from  a  recent  tour  in  this  country,  spoke  earnestly  of 
New  England,  as  the  spot  "  where  two  millions  of  freemen  are 
enjoying  a  higher  degree  of  intelligence,  morality,  and  substantial 
comfort  and  prosperity,  than  any  other  equal  number  of  people 
on  the  face  of  the  earth."  To  what  is  this  owing  ?  To  fairer 
beginnings?  To  exemption  from  dangers  and  burdens?  To 
more  fertile  fields,  and  fairer  skies  ?  Alas,  no !  Never  was 
prosperity  achieved  under  greater  hardships.  The  sunny  plains 
which  Sir  Walter  Raleigh  described  as  a  second  Paradise,  were 
given  to  the  disciples  of  the  Pope.  The  regions  of  eternal  spring 
and  summer  were  given  as  a  field  for  other  principles  to  show  their 
power.  As  if  to  render  the  contrast  more  striking,  there  were 
added  mines  of  gold  and  silver  enough  to  enrich  a  world.  What 
are  those  fields  now  ?  God  stripped  the  Pilgrims  of  everythin 
save  their  principles  an,d  their  life  ;  he  sent  them  in  the  depth  o 
winter  into  a  bleak  and  desolate  land.  He  surrounded  them 

*  Lyell. 


170 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


with  dangers.  At  every  breath  they  were  made  to  tremble  for 
their  freedom  to  worship  God ;  and  lo,  what  hath  been  wrought  ? 
To  the  principles  of  the  Pilgrims,  under  God,  New  England 
owes  all  she  is. 

The  Pilgrims  could  not  foresee  these  splendid  results  of  their 
labors.  What  thoughts  came  rushing  upon  their  minds  as  they 
crowded  the  deck,  and  gazed  upon  the  shores  of  the  New  World ! 
Weary  and  worn,  many  of  them  enfeebled  by  sickness — a  howl- 
ing wilderness  is  before  them,  and  the  rough  ocean  behind. 
"  For  the  season,"  says  Bradford,  "  it  was  winter ;  and  they  that 
know  the  winters  of  that  country,  know  them  to  be  sharp  and 
violent,  and  subject  to  violent  storms,  dangerous  to  travel  to 
known  places,  much  more  to  search  out  unknown  coasts."  *  * 
"  All  things  stand  for  them  to  look  upon  with  a  weather-beaten 
face  ;  and  the  whole  country  being  full  of  thickets  presented  a 
wild  and  savage  hue."  The  captain  of  the  ship  urged  them  to 
seek  out  a  place  for  settlement  with  the  shallop;  for  he  durst  not 
stir  with  the  ship  from  its  first  position  in  Cape  Cod  harbor,  till 
another  safe  harbor  should  be  found.  Again  and  again  the  ex- 
plorers went  forth,  and  returned  without  success,  after  nearly  per- 
ishing in  their  open  shallop,  from  storms  and  cold.  The  captain 
reminded  them  that  "  victuals  consumed  apace ;  and  that  he  must 
and  would  keep  sufficient  for  himself  and  company  on  their  re- 
turn." It  was  rumored  by  the  ship's  company,  that  if  the  Pil- 
grims got  not  a  place  in  time,  they  would  turn  them  ashore  and 
leave  them.  But  at  length  the  good  hand  of  the  Lord  directed  them 
to  Plymouth,  and  after  many  trials  and  hardships  they  were  at 
last,  with  their  effects,  on  the  shore. 

A  dreary  winter  is  before  them.  Three  had  died  in  Cape  Cod 
harbor.  Mrs.  Bradford,  the  wife  of  the  future  governor,  had  fallen 
overboard  and  was  drowned.  Two  more  died  before  the  landing 
at  Plymouth.  Eight  died  in  the  month  of  January ;  seventeen 
more  in  the  month  of  February ;  thirteen  in  the  month  of  March. 
In  three  months  half  their  company  were  dead  :  "  the  greatest 
part,"  says  Bradford,  "  in  the  depth  of  winter ;  wanting  houses 
and  other  comforts,  being  infected  with  the  scurvy  and  other  dis- 
eases which  their  long  voyage  and  unaccorrimodate  condition 
brought  upon  them."  "  Of  a  hundred,  scarce  fifty  remain  ;  the 
living  scarce  able  to  bury  the  dead."  "  In  the  time  of  the  great- 
est distress,  in  the  depth  of  winter,  and  in  want  of  all  resources, 
there  were  not  more  than  six  or  seven  who  were  able  to  tend  the 
sick."  But  as  the  spring  opened  the  mortality  abated  ;  the  sick 
recovered ;  and  hope  and  courage  once  more  returned  to  the  suf- 
fering Pilgrims. 

Oa  the  fifth  of  April,  the  Mayflower  sailed  for  England  ;  and 
it  is  remarkable  that  after  the  experience  of  so  dreadful  a  winter, 


THE   PILGRIMS   AT  PLYMOUTH.  171 

not  one  of  the  surviving  Pilgrims  took  the  opportunity  to  return 
to  his  native  land.* 

In  December  of  the  first  year,  Edward  Winslow  wrote  to  a 
friend  in  England,  that  they  had  built  seven  dwelling-houses, 
and  four  for  the  public  use  of  the  plantation ;  and  had  several 
others  in  a  state  of  forwardness! — they  had  planted  twenty 
acres  of  Indian  corn,  and  sowed  six  acres  of  barley  and  peas. 
And  now,  harvest  being  gathered,  they  kept  the  first  New  Eng- 
land Thanksgiving, — thus  commencing  a  custom  which  the  sons 
and  daughters  of  New  England,  unless  they  shall  prove  sadly 
degenerate,  will  continue  to  observe  till  the  end  of  time. 

The  cold  weather  had  brought  into  the  harbor  an  abundance 
of  water-fowl.  Deer  and  wild  turkeys  were  found  near  the 
settlement.  The  governor  sent  four  men  with  their  guns  to  pro- 
cure the  materials  for  a  feast,  that  they  "  might  after  a  special 
manner  rejoice,  after  they  had  gathered  the  fruit  of  their  labors." 
"  They  four,  in  one  day,  killed  as  much  fowl,  as  with  a  little 
help  beside,  served  the  company  almost  a  week." 

It  was  on  the  9th  of  November,  A.  D.  1621,  that  the  friendly 
Indians  of  Cape  Cod  sent  the  colonists  word  that  a  ship  had  ar- 
rived there :  and  by  the  description  it  was  concluded  that  this 
vessel  must  be  a  Frenchman,  and  probably  come  on  a  hostile 
errand.  Not  long  after,  the  people  of  Plymouth  looking  out  from 
their  hill,  see  the  strange  sight  of  a  sail  making  for  their  harbor. 
Supposing  her  an  enemy,  the  Governor,  says  Winslow,  "  com- 
manded a  great  piece  to  be  shot  off,  to  call  home  such  as 
were  at  work.  Whereupon,  every  man,  yea,  boy  that  could 
handle  a  gun,  were  ready,  with  full  resolution,  that  if  she  were 
an  enemy,  we  would  stand  in  our  just  defence,  not  fearing 
them." 

It  proves  to  be  the  good  ship  "  Fortune,"-— small  indeed,— of 
only  fifty-five  tons — but  bringing  over  thirty-five  new  settlers  ;  a 
part  of  whom  were  the  persons  left  by  the  Speedwell.  She  had 
sailed  in  the  beginning  of  July,  and  it  was  now  the  llth  of  No- 
vember when  she  came  into  the  harbor  of  Plymouth. 

On  the  13th  of  December  the  Fortune  sails,  laden  with  two 
hogsheads  of  beaver  and  other  articles  which  the  colonists  had 
collected  ;  together  with  "good  clap-boards,  and  sassafras, as  full 
as  she  can  hold ;"  the  fruit  of  the  industry  of  the  colonists  in 
their  first  season.  The  whole  was  estimated  at  £500  ;  but  as 
the  ship  drew  near  to  the  English  coast  she  was  taken  by  the 
French,  and  all  was  lost. 

By  this  ship,  Winslow  wrote  to  his  friends  who  might  be 
about  to  come  over,  to  use  great  caution  in  packing  their  pro- 

*  Six  more  died  before  the  end  of  November.  Most  of  the  survivors  were  suffered 
to  live  to  extreme  old  age. 


172 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


visions,  and  not  to  rely  upon  supplies  from  the  colony,  as  the 
new  company  already  arrived  would  create  a  scarcity  before  the 
-next  harvest.  "  Bring  every  man  a  musket  or  a  fowling-piece," 
said  he.  "  Let  your  piece  be  long  in  the  barrel,  and  fear  not  the 
weight  of  it,  for  most  of  our  shooting  is  from  stands."  "  Bring 
paper  and  linseed  oil  for  your  windows,  and  cotton  for  your 
lamps." 

Before  the  end  of  May,  1622,  their  store  of  provision  was 
spent ;  and  they  had  for  some  time  lived  on  short  allowance. 
The  last  company  had  not  landed  so  much  as  a  barrel  of  bread 
or  meal ;  and  the  ship  had  to  be  furnished  from  the  stores  of  the 
colony  for  her  voyage  home.  A  ship  also  arrived  at  the  fishing- 
grounds  some  hundred  and  twenty  miles  distant,  and  sent  seve- 
ral colonists  more.  These  also  brought  no  more  provisions  than 
were  necessary  for  their  boats'  crew  on  their  return. 

The  colonists  were  now  destitute  of  bread.  The  Indians  be- 
gan to  cast  forth  insulting  speeches,  reminding  them  of  their 
weakness  and  threatening  their  destruction.  The  colonists 
erect  a  fort  on  the  hill,  from  which  a  few  men  may  defend  the 
town,  while  the  rest  are  employed  in  necessary  affairs.  And 
though  this  took  the  greatest  part  of  their  strength  from  dressing 
corn,  "  yet,"  said  they,  "  life  being  continued,  we  hoped 
God  would  raise  some  means  instead  for  our  further  preserva- 
tion." It  was  now  June  ;  harvest  was  yet  at  a  distance.  The 
people  were  weakened,  and  some  bloated  and  swelled  for  want 
of  suitable  provisions.  "  Strong  men,"  said  Winslow,  "  stag- 
gered for  want  of  food."  A  party  was  dispatched  to  the  fishing- 
grounds,  who  obtained  some  small  supplies  from  the  ships  resort- 
ing thither.  In  July,  two  ships  with  colonists  for  Virginia  came 
in.  Part  of  these  emigrants  were  left,  while  the  others  were  on 
an  exploring  expedition  ;  and  these  committed  such  depredations 
on  the  green  corn  of  the  colony,  as  prepared  the  way  for  a  scarcity 
in  the  coming  year.  In  August  two  trading  ships  came,  from 
which  they  obtained  some  supplies.  With  great  hazard  and  toil 
some  further  supplies  were  obtained  from  the  Indians  at  a  dis- 
tance. These  supplies  saved  the  colony. 

The  spring  opened  fairly  in  the  next  year,  and  the  colonists 
made  such  efforts  as  they  supposed  would  secure  them  from 
want.  But  Providence  seemed  to  frown.  From  the  end  of 
May  a  severe  drought  continued  till  all  their  crops  seemed 
withered  and  burnt  up.  In  addition  to  this,  a  ship  sent  to  them 
with  supplies,  of  which  they  had  had  notice  several  months, 
failed  to  arrive.  Fragments  of  a  wreck  were  discovered  on  the 
coast,  which  they  concluded  to  be  the  remains  of  their  expected 
vessel. 

Then  every  man  began  to  look  into  his  own  conscience  before 


THE  PILGRIMS  AT  PLYMOUTH.  173 

God.  A  day  was  set  apart  for  fasting  and  prayer.  The  morn- 
ing of  that  day  was  clear  and  sultry,  like  many  which  had 
preceded  it.  The  exercises  of  the  fast  continued  eight  or  nine 
hours ;  and  ere  the  people  separated  the  sky  was  overcast. 
From  that  evening  there  distilled  a  succession  of  gentle  showers 
for  fourteen  days.  Their  crops  revived.  They  became  cheer- 
ful with  hope.  News  came  of  their  supply-ship,  which  having 
been  twice  driven  back  was  now  prosperously  on  her  way. 
"  And  therefore,"  says  Winslow,  "  another  solemn  day  was  set 
apart,  wherein  we  returned  glory  and  honor  and  praise,  with 
all  thankfulness  to  God,  who  had  dealt  so  graciously  with  us." 

In  the  latter  part  of  August  their  expected  supply-ship,  the  Ann, 
arrives;  bringing,  together  with  supplies,  about  sixty  new  colonists. 
Among  these  are  some  of  the  wives  and  children  whom  several 
of  the  first  adventurers  had  left  behind  them  in  Holland. 

"  When  these  passengers  see  our  poor  condition,"  says  Brad- 
ford, "  they  are  much  dismayed,  and  full  of  sadness :  only  our 
old  friends  rejoice  to  see  us,  and  that  it  is  no  worse."  "  The 
best  dish  we  could  present  them  with,  is  a  lobster  or  piece  of 
fish,  without  bread,  or  anything  else  but  a  cup  of  fair  spring 
water." 

A  few  days  after  came  in  the  ship,  the  "  Little  James,"  of  forty- 
four  tons,  new-built,  and  designed  to  remain  in  the  country. 

On  the  10th  of  September,  1623,  the  pinnace  is  fitted  and 
ready  to  sail  for  trade.  The  Ann  sails  for  London  laden  with 
what  clap-boards,  and  beaver  and  other  furs,  the  colonists  have 
procured.  "  And  now,"  says  Bradford,  "  our  harvest  comes. 
Instead  of  famine  we  have  plenty.  The  face  of  things  is  changed 
to  the  joy  of  our  hearts  ;  nor  has  there  been  any  general  want  of 
food  among  us  since  to  this  day." 

Thus,  through  the  good  providence  of  God,  the  colony  is 
established.  Amid  perils  and  distresses  the  foundations  are  laid. 
We  must  now  return  to  England,  and  trace  the  further  progress 
of  the  persecutions,  which  resulted  in  driving  off  the  people  who 
laid  the  foundations  of  the  other  early  colonies  and  churches  of 
New  England. 


' 


XIII. 


THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND. 

Vacillating  and  Irritating  Policy  of  James.  Sycophantic  bearing  of  the 
Bishops.  Passive  Obedience  and  Non-Resistance.  Attempts  of  James 
to  establish  Episcopacy  in  Scotland.  Assembly  of  Perth.  Change  in 
the  King's  Theology.  Original  Calvinism  of  the  English  Church.  Lam- 
beth Articles.  Book  of  Sports.  Perfidy  of  James. 

THE  wrongs  of  the  Puritans  at  length  aroused  the  sympathies  of 
the  nation.  Their  principles  and  arguments  had  awakened  the 
people  to  some  just  perception  of  their  rights ;  and  from  this 
time  the  spirit  of  freedom  in  the  House  of  Commons  had  become 
too  daring  to  be  overawed,  and  too  strong  to  be  crushed.  It 
is  questionable  whether  even  the  resolute  Henry  VIIL,  or  the 
imperious  Elizabeth,  could  have  checked  the  rising  spirit  of 
liberty.  Elizabeth,  however,  always  had  sagacity  to  discern 
when  it  was  necessary  to  yield,  and  the  good  policy  to  yield  in 
such  time,  that  instead  of  allowing  her  subjects  to  learn  their 
strength  by  driving  her  from  her  positions,  she  always  made  her 
concessions  appear  to  be  the  fruit  of  her  goodness.  In  this  man- 
ner her  very  concessions  increased  her  popularity  and  augmented 
her  real  power.  Her  people  were  not  disposed  to  inquire  con- 
cerning their  rights,  while  they  were  rather  inclined  to  seek  how 
they  should  show  their  gratitude,  and  exhibit  further  their  confi- 
dence in  so  beneficent  a  sovereign.  Thus  Elizabeth  continued 
an  absolute  despot,  and  yet  a  most  popular  sovereign  to  her  life's 
end. 

James  never  knew  when  to  yield,  or  how  to  do  it  with  grace. 
He  was  self-conceited  and  obstinate  enough,  but  he  had  neither 
courage,  vigor,  magnanimity,  nor  any  true  sagacity.  Without 
necessity,  he  was  for  ever  fond  of  declaring  on  all  occasions  his 
own  divine  and  indefeasible  prerogatives  as  an  absolute  king. 
The  assertion  of  these  prerogatives  without  occasion,  induced 
people  to  examine  their  nature  and  foundation  ;  and  the  perpetual 
efforts  of  James  to  break  down  his  people's  liberties,  without 
doing  anything  effectual,  not  only  taught  his  people  their  power, 
but  goaded  them  up  to  desperation.  This  craving  desire  to  play 


THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND.  175 

the  despot,  these  high  notions  of  the  regal  prerogatives,  without 
courage  or  energy  to  meet  the  resistance  which  these  irritating 
claims  and  these  petty  acts  of  tyranny  awakened,  drove  James 
into  a  perpetual  course  of  dissimulation.  "  His  reign,"  says 
Burnet,  "  was  a  constant  course  of  mean  practices."  And  while 
steering  amid  these  breakers, — and  dodging,  turning,  twisting 
and  lying,  to  effect  his  purposes,  and  to  escape  from  difficulties 
which  an  upright  and  magnanimous  prince  would  never  have 
encountered, — his  perceptions  of  moral  obligation  were  so  dis- 
torted, that  he  prided  himself  on  these  acts  of  dishonesty  and  false- 
hood, as  though  he  had  now  become  a  proficient  in  the  art  and 
mystery  of  "  Kingcraft ;"  as  though  no  truth,  nor  honesty,  nor 
honor  were  requisite  in  one  who  sits  upon  a  throne ! 

The  bishops  were  ever  ready  to  maintain  his  royal  preroga- 
tives in  their  fullest  extent.  On  all  occasions  they  approached 
him  with  flatteries;  and  no  flattery  ever  seemed  fulsome  to  King 
James.  Passive  obedience  and  Non-Resistance^  was  their  con- 
stant doctrine  ;  and  the  king  in  return  was  ever  ready  to  lend 
himself  to  the  furtherance  of  their  views.  The  Puritans  dared  to 
talk  of  rights,  and  therefore  the  king  hated  them.  He  thought 
them  weak,  and  therefore  he  ventured  to  oppress  them. 

James  had  penetration  enough  to  discern  the  inevitable  ten- 
dencies of  the  antagonist  principles  of  High  Churchism  and  Puri- 
tanism. The  friends  of  freedom  saw  it  too;  and  from  this 
moment  the  principles  which  had  been  antagonists  in  religion, 
began  to  form  the  elementary  basis  of  two  great  political  parties. 
The  bishops,  the  king,  the  admirers  of  arbitrary  authority,  and 
the  despisers  of  popular  rights,  were  ranged  on  one  side  ;  on  the 
other  side  the  friends  of  popular  freedom,  of  every  name,  and 
however  differing  in  religious  preferences,  rallied  round  the 
Puritans.  Here  were  planted  the  germs  of  those  commotions 
which  in  a  few  years  overturned  the  throne  ;  and  as  the  Hier- 
archy, under  the  name  of  The  Church,  joined  their  destinies  to. 
the  destinies  of  arbitrary  power,  when  the  king  fell,  the  hierarchy 
fell  with  him.  This  is  an  outline  of  the  affairs  which  are  now 
to' come  under  review. 

When  James  summoned  his  first  Parliament  in  1604,  he  took 
it  upon  himself  to  direct  his  people  what  sort  of  representatives 
they  should  elect ;  and  threatened,  that  if  any  other  sort  were 
elected,  and  should  take  upon  themselves  the  office,  he  would 
fine  or  imprison  them.  "  He  threatened  to  fine  and  disfranchise 
those  corporations  that  did  not  choose  to  his  mind."*  When  the 
Commons  assembled,  he  interfered  with  their  examination  of 
elections.  He  required  a  conference  between  the  House  and  his 
judges,  which,  he  said,  he  "  commanded  as  an  absolute  king."f 
*  Hume.  t  Ibid. 


176 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


"  He  added,  that  all  their  privileges  were  derived  from  his  grant, 
and  he  hoped  they  would  not  turn  them  against  him."  The 
Commons  yielded;  but  with  murmurings  of  "  Rights"  "not 
privileges  ;" — RIGHTS  left  them  by  their  ancestors,  and  which  they 
were  bound  to  transmit  to  their  posterity  : — not  privileges  depen- 
dent on  the  grant  and  tolerance  of  an  absolute  king. 

In  ancient  times,  the  Parliament  had  granted  the  crown  duties 
of  tonnage  and  poundage  on  various  commodities,  and  for  limit- 
ed times  ;  arid  as  the  grant  expired  from  time  to  time,  it  had  been 
by  act  of  Parliament  renewed.  Henry  V.,  and  the  sovereigns 
succeeding  him,  had  had  these  revenues  conferred  upon  them  for 
life.  King  James,  however,  thought  them  the  natural  dues  of 
his  prerogative ;  and  by  virtue  of  the  same,  took  it  upon  him  to 
alter  the  rates,  and  to  establish  higher  impositions.  The  Parlia- 
ment saw  the  mischief  of  the  principle  ;  the  same  reasons,  they 
declared,  might  extend  "  even  to  the  utter  ruin  of  the  ancient 
liberty  of  the  kingdom,  and  the  subjects'  right  of  property  in 
their  land  and  goods."  The  king  forbade  them  to  touch  his 
prerogative. :  but  they  passed  a  bill  abolishing  these  impositions, 
which  bill  was,  however,  rejected  by  the  House  of  Lords. 

The  Commons  now  took  hold  of  ecclesiastical  oppressions. 
Bold  speeches  were  made  concerning  the  proceedings  of  the 
bishops'  courts ;  the  oppressive  subscriptions  required ;  the  oath 
ex  officio ;  and  the  High  Commission.  The  king  summoned 
both  Houses  to  Whitehall,  and  told  them  that  "  the  power  of 
kings  was  like  the  Divine  power ;  that  as  God  can  create  and 
destroy,  so  kings  can  give  life  and  death  ;  judge  all,  and  be 
judged  by  none  ;"  *  *  "  that  as  it  was  blasphemy  to  dispute 
what  God  might  do,  so  it  was  sedition  in  subjects  to  dispute 
what  a  king  might  do."  *  *  "He  commanded  them,  there- 
fore, not  to  meddle  with  the  main  points  in  his  government, 
which  would  be  to  lessen  his  craft,  who  had  been  thirty  years  at 
his  trade  in  Scotland,  and  served  an  apprenticeship  of  seven 
years  in  England."* 

The  Parliament,  nothing  terrified,  went  on  asserting  their 
rights.  On  the  24th  of  May,  1610,  twenty-three  of  the  lower 
house  presented  a  remonstrance,  declaring  that  "  They  do  hold  it 
their  undoubted  right  to  examine  into  the  grievances  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  to  inquire  into  their  own  rights  and  properties,  as  well 
as  his  majesty's  prerogative."  Thus  was  an  issue  made  between 
the  Parliament  and  king,  which  was  not  to  be  determined  till  the 
nation  was  whelmed  in  blood. 

In  foreign  affairs  James  was  always  timid  and  inefficient.  An 
opportunity  to  exhibit  himself  as  a  royal  theologian,  however, 
was  enough  to  rouse  his  utmost  energies.  "  A  professor  of  divin- 

*  Neale. 


THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND.  177 

ity,  named  Vorstius,  a  disciple  of  Arminius,  had  been  called  to 
the  university  of  Leyden.  James  having  read  a  work  of  Vorstius, 
declared  the  writer  to  be  an  arch-heretic,  a  pest,  a  monster  of 
blasphemies ;  and  ordered  the  book  to  be  burnt  publicly  in  St. 
Paul's  churchyard  and  at  both  universities.  He  wrote  to  the 
States  of  Holland  thus :  As  God  hath  honored  us  with  the  title 
of  Defender  of  the  Faith^  so  (if  you  incline  to  retain  Vorstius  any 
longer)  we  shall  be  obliged  not  only  to  separate  and  cut  ourselves 
off  from  such  false  and  heretical  Churches,  but  likewise  to  call 
upon  all  the  rest  of  the  reformed  Churches  to  enter  upon  the  same 
common  consultation,  how  we  may  best  extinguish  and  send 
back  to  hell  these  cursed  "  [viz.  Arminiari]  "  heresies  that  have 
newly  broke  forth."*  "  As  to  burning  Vorstius  for  his  blasphe- 
mies and  atheism,  he  left  them  to  their  own.  Christian  wisdom, 
but  told  them  that  surely  never  heretic  better  deserved  the 
flames."!  The  States  of  Holland  were  not  in  the  practice  of 
burning  men  for  heresy  ;  though  such  was- the  weight  and  perse- 
verance of  the  King's  diplomacy,  that  he  gained  the  royal  victory 
of  causing  Vorstius  to  be  deprived  of  his  chair,  and  to  be  banish- 
ed from  the  Dutch  dominions.  In  the  course  of  that  diplomacy 
James  denounced  Arminius  as  an  enemy  of  God ;  and  another 
who  had  written  against  the  Saints'  perseverance,  the  king  de- 
clared "  worthy  of  the  fire."  We  shall  remember  this  when  we 
come  to  his  league  with  Arminianism  and  Popery,  for  putting 
down  the  Puritans.  James  published  his  manifesto  of  what  he 
had  done  in  the  affair  of  Vorstius,  in  several  languages. 

In  the  same  year  the  king  tried  again  his  theological  powers 
in  conjunction  with  some  of  his  bishops,  in  a  disputation  with 
two  of  his  own  subjects,  who  had  embraced  Arian  sentiments : 
the  issue  was  that  one  of  his  opponents  was  by  the  king's  writ 
taken  to  Smith  field  and  burnt  to  ashes. 

In  the  midst  of  all  this  zeal  for  religious  truth,  while  the  Puri- 
tans were  imprisoned,  pursued,  hunted,  plundered,  and  hindered 
in  their  efforts  to  leave  the  kingdom ;  and  while  the  king  was 
exercising  his  functions  as  Defender  of  the  Faith  in  Holland,  and 
burning  heretics  in  his  own  dominions,* — the  court  was  a  scene 
of  indolence,  luxury,  amours,  lasciviousness  and  debauchery. 
The  king  lavished  his  fortunes  upon  worthless  favorites,  and  was 
obliged  to  have  recourse  to  arbitrary  and  illegal  methods  of  rais- 
ing money  by  his  prerogatives.  He  invented  a  new  order  of 
knights  baronets,  and  sold  the  honor  for  £1000  a  patent.  He 
obliged  such  as  were  worth  £40  a  year  to  compound  for  not 
taking  the  honors  of  knighthood.  He  sold  patents  of  nobility  at 
£10,000  for  a  baron,  £15,000  for  a  viscount,  £20,000  for  an  earl, 
The  business  of  fining  in  the  Star  Chamber  was  driven  forward 

*  Neale.  t  Hume. 

12 


178  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

with  vigor.  But  all  these  expedients  came  short  of  his  necessi- 
ties, and  he  was  forced  again  to  call  a  Parliament.  The  Parlia- 
ment met  in  April,  1614,  and  immediately  entered  upon  a  con- 
sideration and  redress  of  grievances.  The  king  in  anger  dissolved 
them  before  they  had  passed  one  act,  arid  threw  the  members 
who  had  been  most  forward  against  his  measures  into  prison. 
"  Full  of  his  prerogative,"  says  Neale,  "  he  apprehended  he  could 
convince  his  subjects  of  it ;  and  for  this  purpose  turned  preacher 
in  the  Star  Chamber ;  and  took  his  text  from  Ps.  72,  1 :  4  Give 
the  king  thy  judgments,  O  God.'  After  dividing  and  subdi- 
viding, and  giving  the  literal  and  mystical  sense  of  the  text,  he 
applied  it  to  the  judges  and  courts  of  judicature;  telling  them 
that '  The  king  sitting  in  the  throne  of  God,  all  judgments  centre 
in  him :  and  therefore,  for  inferior  courts  to  determine  difficult 
questions  without  consulting  him,  is  to  encroach  upon  his  prero- 
gative, and  to  limit  his  power ;  which  it  is  not  lawful  for  the 
tongue  of  a  lawyer  nor  any  subject  to  dispute.  As  it  is  atheism 
and  blasphemy  to  dispute  what  God  can  do  (says  he),  so  it  is 
presumption  and  high  contempt  to  dispute  what  kings  can  do  or 
say :  it  is  to  take  away  that  mystical  reverence  that  belongs  to 
them  who  sit  in  the  throne  of  God : '  then  addressing  the  audi- 
tory, he  advised  them  not  to  meddle  with  the  king's  prerogative. 
4  Plead  not  upon  Puritanic  principles,  which  make  all  things 
popular/  said  he,  l  but  keep  within  the  ancient  limits.'  He  then 
turned  his  speech  against  the  non-conformists,  both  Puritans  and 
Papists ;  and  concluded  with  exhorting  the  judges  to  counte- 
nance the  clergy  against  them  both;  adding,  '  God  and  the  king 
will  reward  your  zeal.'" 

It  was  now  A.  D.  1617,  just  about  the  time  that  the  Pilgrims 
in  Holland  were  beginning  to  agitate  the  question  of  removing 
to  America,  when  King  James  set  himself  about  the  work  of 
establishing  Episcopacy  in  Scotland.  Ever  since  the  Reforma- 
tion, the  Scotsmen  had  looked  with  more  than  suspicion  upon 
anything  that  resembled  an  order  of  Bishops.  At  the  instance 
of  King  James,  they  had  been  engaged  to  admit  them  as  per- 
petual presidents  or  moderators  in  their  ecclesiastical  synods, 
but  with  an  explicit  disavowal  of  all  spiritual  jurisdiction,  and  of 
their  holding  any  power  over  other  ministers.  James  intended 
this  as  the  beginning  of  a  gradual  introduction  of  Episcopacy. 
His  next  step  was  to  introduce  the  ceremonies  of  the  Church  of 
England,  with  the  festivals  of  Christmas,  Easter,  Whitsuntide, 
and  Ascension.  An  assembly  had  been  summoned  at  Aber- 
deen. The  king,  to  forward  his  own  purposes,  prorogued  it  to 
the  following  year.  "  Some  of  the  clergy,  disavowing  his  eccle- 
siastical supremacy,  met  at  the  time  first  appointed,  notwith- 
standing his  prohibition.  He  threw  them  into  prison.  Such  of 


THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND.  179 

them  as  submitted  and  acknowledged  their  error,  were  pardoned. 
The  rest  were  condemned  as  guilty  of  high  treason.  The  king 
gave  them  their  lives,  but  banished  them  from  the  kingdom."* 

The  king  now,  on  the  sole  strength  of  his  prerogative,  ven- 
tured to  set  up  a  Court  of  High  Commission  in  Scotland,  in 
imitation  of  that  of  England.  The  bishops  and  a  few  of  the 
clergy  who  had  been  summoned,  acknowledged  the  authority 
of  this  court,  and  it  proceeded  immediately  to  business,  as  if  its 
authority  had  been  grounded  on  the  full  consent  of  the  whole 
legislature.! 

James  now  made  a  royal  progress  into  Scotland  for  accom- 
plishing his  design.  Pictures  and  statues  of  the  Twelve  Apostles 
were  carried  up  and  set  in  the  chapel  of  Edinburgh.  The  king 
told  the  Scots'  assembly  and  the  parliament,  "  That  it  was  a 
power  innate ;  a  princely  special  prerogative  which  Christian 
kings  have,  to  order  and  dispose  external  things  in  the  outward 
polity  of  the  Church  ;  or  as  "  we  [the  king]  with  our  bishops  shall 
think  fit."  "  And,  sirs,"  said  he,  "  for  your  approval  or  disap- 
proval, deceive  not  yourselves  ;  I  will  not  have  my  reason  op- 
posed."J  Some  ministers  protecting  against  these  things,  were 
suspended,  deprived,  and  banished. 

The  next  year,  A.  D.  1618,  an  assembly  (or  rather  convention), 
consisting  of  some  noblemen  and  burgesses,  "  chosen  on  purpose 
to  bear  down  the  ministers  "  of  the  Gospel,  met  at  Perth ;  and 
passed  several  articles  establishing  sundry  of  the  ceremonials  and 
festivals  of  the  Church  of  England.  The  king  caused  them  to  be 
proclaimed  in  the  market-place,  and  ordered  them  to  be  published 
from  the  pulpits.  The  Scottish  ministers  refused.  In  1621,  an 
attempt  was  made  to  ratify  in  Parliament,  the  articles  of  the  As- 
sembly of  Perth.  The  Scottish  ministers  were  ready  with  their 
protestation,  and  poured  into  Edinburgh  in  great  numbers  to  sup- 
port it.  The  king's  commissioners,  by  advice  of  the  bishops,  is- 
sued a  proclamation  commanding  all  ministers  to  depart  out  of 
Edinburgh  in  twenty-four  hours,  except  the  settled  ministers  of 
the  city,  and  such  as  have  a  license  from  the  bishop.  The  minis- 
ters obeyed,  leaving  behind  them  a  solemn  protestation  against 
the  articles  of  Perth,  and  affirming  the  illegality  of  the  assembly 
by  which  they  were  passed.  The  Scots'  blood  was  up,  and  King 
James  durst  proceed  no  further.  He  left  the  work  of  completing 
his  design  of  imposing  episcopacy  upon  the  Scots,  to  his  un- 
happy son  ;  who,  in  attempting  to  carry  out  the  plan,  set  the 
kingdom  in  aflame,  which  was  not  quenched  till  he  had  lost  both 
kingdom  and  life. 

The  English  Parliament  was  now  roused  by  the  king's  entrench- 
ment upon  their  liberties,  as  well  as  by  several  other  things  ap- 
*Hume.  tlbid.  t  Neale. 


180  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

parent  in  his  general  policy,  such  as  his  supineness  in  neglecting 
to  defend  his  son-in-law  the  Elector  Palatine  :  and  his  evident 
willingness  to  betray  the  Protestant  cause  and  to  entail  a  Popish 
sovereign  on  England,  in  his  concessions  to  promote  the  mar- 
riage of  his  son  Charles  with  a  princess  of  Spain.  The  Com- 
mons began  to  frame  a  remonstrance  to  be  laid  before  the  king. 
The  king  wrote  to  the  Speaker  a  sharp  rebuke,  forbidding  the 
Commons  to  meddle  with  anything  that  regarded  his  govern- 
ment ;  and  gave  them  intimations  that  a  prison  awaited  such  as 
should  venture  to  disobey  his  commands.  "  He  plainly  told  them 
that  he  thought  himself  fully  entitled  to  punish  every  misdemeanor 
in  Parliament,  as  well  during  its  sitting  as  after  its  dissolution  ; 
and  that  he  intended  thenceforward  to  chastise  every  man  whose 
insolent  behavior  should  give  occasion  of  offence."* 

The  Commons  were  inflamed,  not  terrified.  They  drew  up 
a  new  remonstrance,  asserting  their  rights,  and  sent  a  committee 
of  twelve  to  carry  it  to  the  king.  The  king  heard  of  their  approach, 
and  ordered  twelve  chairs  to  be  brought,  "  for  there  were  so 
many  kings  a  coming."  He  told  them  that  what  they  called 
rights^  they  had  rather,  by  royal  toleration,  than  by  inheritance ; 
that  they  were  derived  and  held  from  "  the  grace  and  permission" 
of  the  king's  ancestors  and  of  himself. 

The  Commons  voted,  "  That  the  liberties,  franchises,  privileges, 
and  jurisdictions  of  parliament,  are  the  ancient  and  undoubted 
birthright  and  inheritance  of  the  subjects  of  England"^  The 
king  sent  for  the  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons.  With  his 
own  hand  he  tore  this  protestation  from  the  book,  and  dissolved 
the  Parliament.  The  leading  members  of  the  House,  Sir 
Edward  Coke,  and  Sir  Robert  Phillips,  were  committed  to  the 
tower ;  Selden,  Prynne,  and  Mallory,  to  other  prisons.  Others 
were  ordered  abroad  on  the  king's  business,  into  an  honorable 
banishment ;  the  king  claiming  the  prerogative  of  employing  in 
his  affairs  any  man,  at  any  time,  and  anywhere. 

We  begin  here  to  see  the  spirit,  and  to  meet  with  the  names 
of  men,  who,  in  the  next  reign,  jeoparded  their  lives  in  defence 
of  the  national  liberties. 

We  come  now  to  the  remarkable  change  which  came  over  the 
king's  theology  :  a  change  which  so  largely  influenced  his  policy 
and  the  affairs  of  the  nation. 

Calvin  had  been  held  in  the  highest  repute  by  all  the  Reform- 
ers of  England.  By  appointment  of  the  Convocation,  Calvin's 
Institutes  were  made  the  text-book  of  theology  in  the  Universi- 
ties of  Cambridge  and  Oxford.  Not  only  are  the  Articles  of 
the  English  Church  thoroughly  Calvinistic,  but  the  celebrated 
Lambeth  Articles  drawn  up  A.  D.  1595,  by  Archbishop  Whit- 

*  Hume.  t  Ibid. 


THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND.  181 

gift,  and  carrying  the  dogmas  concerning  predestination  to  an 
extreme  beyond  Calvin,  were  strictly  enjoined  upon  students, 
who  were  forbidden  to  allow  their  judgments  to  vary  from  the 
doctrine  of  these  Articles.  The  occasion  of  these  Articles  was 
as  follows  :  A  Mr.  Barret  had  ventured  to  assail  Calvin's  doctrine 
concerning  Predestination  and  Perseverance.  He  was  summon- 
ed before  the  Chancellor,  and  heads  of  the  University,  and 
obliged  to  retract  in  St.  Mary's  Church.  Nor  did  this  satisfy  the 
heads  of  the  University ;  but  they  demanded  that  the  names  of 
Peter  Martyr,  Calvin,  Beza  and  Zanchius,  which  this  man  had 
reproached,  should  receive  some  further  honorable  amende. 
Both  parties  appealed  to  the  Archbishop,  and  the  result  was  the 
establishment  of  the  celebrated  Lambeth  Articles,  as  the  authori- 
tative exposition  of  the  sense  of  the  Church  of  England  upon 
these  points.  The  following  are  the  Articles  :* 

1.  "  God   hath  from  eternity  predestinated  certain  persons  to 
life,  and  hath  reprobated  certain  persons  unto  death." 

2.  "  The  moving  or  efficient  cause  of  predestination  unto  life 
is  not  the  foresight  of  faith  or  perseverance,  or  of  good  works,  or 
of  anything  that  is  in  the  persons  predestinated  ;  but  the  alone 
will  of  God's  good  pleasure." 

3.  "  The  predestinati  are  a  pre-determined  and  certain  number 
which  can  neither  be  lessened  nor  increased." 

4.  "  Such  as  are  not  predestinated  to  salvation  shall  inevitably 
be  condemned  on  account  of  their  sins." 

5.  "  The  true,  lively,  and  justifying  faith,  and  the  Spirit  of  God 
justifying,  is  not  extinguished,  doth  not  utterly  fail,  doth  not 
vanish  away  in  the  elect,  either  finally  or  totally." 

6.  "  A  true  believer,  that  is,  one  who  is  endowed  with  justify- 
ing faith,  is  certified  by  the  full  assurance  of  faith  that  his  sins 
are  forgiven,  and  that  he  shall  be  everlastingly  saved  by  Christ." 

7.  "  Saving  grace  is  not  allowed,  is  not  imparted,  is  not  granted 
to  all  men,  by  which  they  may  be  saved  if  they  will." 

8.  "  No  man  is  able  to  come  to  Christ,  unless  it  be  given  him ; 
and  unless  the  Father  draw  him  ;  and  all  men  are  not  drawn  by 
the  Father,  that  they  may  come  to  his  Son." 

9.  "  It  is  not  in  the  will  or  power  of  every  man  to  be  saved." 
It  is  now  well  understood   that  the  body  of  the  Episcopal 

clergy,  both  in  England  and  the  United  States,  hold  the  Armi- 
nian  sentiments  on  these  points  ;  while,  nevertheless,  this  author- 
itative and  ultra- Calvinistic  interpretation  of  the  sense  of  the 
Church  in  the  17th  of  her  Articles,  has  never,  so  far  as  I  can 
learn,  been  either  reversed  or  annulled.  Nor,  if  the  Church 
should  reverse  this  authoritative  interpretation,  am  I  at  all  able 
to  understand  how  she  is  authorized  to  interpret  her  Articles  both 

*  Buck's  Theological  Dictionary. 


182  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ways.  The  sentiments  of  those  who  framed  these  Articles  were 
thoroughly  Calvinistic.  The  present  prevalent  belief  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  on  these  points  is  rather  a  sorry  comment 
upon  the  boasted  efficacy  of  her  "  Standards."* 

King  James  had  'loaded  the  name  not  only  of  Vorstius  but 
of  Arminius  himself  with  the  bitterest  epithets  he  could  invent. 
When,  upon  the  fierce  disputes  against  Arminianism  in  Holland, 
the  Synod  of  Dort  was  called  in  1618,  King  James,  full  of  zeal 
against  the  Arminian  doctrines,  sent  as  his  delegates  to  that 
synod,  Dr.  Carleton,  Bishop  of  Landaff,  Dr.  Hall,  Dean  of  Wor- 
cester, afterwards  the  celebrated  Bishop  of  Norwich,  and  Dr. 
Davenant,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Salisbury.  The  English  divines 
concurred  in  the  severe  condemnation  of  Arminianism  by  the 
Synod  of  Dort.  Bishop  Hall,  some  years  afterwards,  said,  I, 
shall  live  and  die  in  the  suffrage  of  that  Synod  of  Dort ;  and  I 
do  confidently  avow  that  those  other  opinions"  [of  Arminians] 
"  cannot  stand  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England." 
Bishop  Davenant  replied  in  these  words  :  "  I  know  that  no  man 
can  embrace  Arminianism,  *  *  *  but  he  must  desert  the 
Articles  agreed  upon  by  the  Church  of  England." 

Whether  such  were  the  natural  affinities  of  the  two  schemes, 
of  theology  or  not,  such  was  the  fact  which  James  was  notback- 
ward  to  discover ;  that  those  who  scrupled  the  ceremonies  and 
habits  of  the  Church,  were  uniformly  attached  to  the  Calvinistic 
doctrine ;  while  the  Arminians  in  sentiment  were  not  only  dis- 
posed to  receive  the  ceremonies,  but  to  favor  the  prerogatives 
claimed  both  by  the  Church  and  the  king.  This  was  induce- 
ment enough  for  James  to  change  his  theology.  He  advanced 
the  most  zealous  Arminians  to  bishoprics;  among  whom  was  the 
famous  LAUD.  Whoever  stood  by  the  laws  and  the  constitution 
in  opposition  to  his  arbitrary  power,  was  in  James'  view  a  Puri- 
tan in  state.  Every  Calvinist  was,  in  his  esteem,  a  doctrinal  Pu- 
ritan. From  this  time  "  the  fashionable  doctrines  at  court  were 
such  as  the  king  had  condemned  at  the  Synod  of  Dort,  and 
which,  in  the  opinion  of  the  old  English  clergy,  were  subversive 
of  the  Reformation." 

Still  another  element  now  began  to  mingle  in  the  prevailing 
theology.  The  tenets,  which  are  now  known  by  the  name  of 
Oxford  Tractarianism  or  Puseyism,  had  now  begun  to  prevail ; 
as  has  already  been  shown  in  our  view  of  the  great  work  of  the 
"  JudiciousHooker."  Hooker  lived  nearer  the  old  Reformers,  and, 
therefore,  the  Popery  in  his  scheme  was  very  unnaturally  and 
discordantly  mingled  with  Calvinism :  a  compound  which  was 

*  The  sarcastic  saying  of  the  great  Lord  Chatham  was  not  without  foundation  : 
"  We  have,"  said  he,  "  Calvinistic  Articles,  a  Popish  Liturgy,  and  an  Arminian 
Clergy." 


THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND.  183 

sure  not  to  endure  very  long :  and  in  spite  of  some  popish  ele- 
ments, there  are  traits  and  passages  in  Hooker's  theology  upon 
which  Evangelical  Christians  of  all  denominations  still  look  with 
admiration.  But  now,  under  the  change  of  King  James'  theolo- 
gical politics,  the  prevalent  doctrine  in  the  Church  of  England, 
was  fast  becoming  that  compound  of  Arminianism  and  Popery, 
now  known  as  Puseyism. 

The  divines  of  this  stamp,  conscious  that  their  Arminian  sen- 
timents were  inconsistent  with  the  received  sense  of  the  39 
Articles,  "  and  being  afraid  of  the  censures  of  Parliament,  took 
shelter  under  the  Royal  Prerogative ;  and  went  into  all  the  slav- 
ish measures  of  the  court,  in  order  to  secure  the  royal  favor." 
The  Papists,  hoping  nothing  from  Parliament,  joined  with  the 
court  divines  to  support  the  dispensing  power,  and  unlimited 
prerogatives  of  the  king.  The  king  lavished  his  favors  upon 
Arminians  and  Papists,  who  upheld  his  prerogatives ;  and 
bestowed  his  frowns  upon  the  Puritans,  both  nonconformist, 
doctrinal,  and  political,  who  all  united  in  the  maintenance  of 
popular  rights  against  the  assumptions  of  the  crown. 

The  lines  of  party  were  now  distinctly  drawn.  "  All,"  says 
Neale,  "who  opposed  the  king's  arbitrary  measures,  were  called 
at  court  Puritans ;  and  those  who  stood  by  the  crown  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  Parliament,  went  by  the  names  of  Papists  and 
Arminians." 

By  the  king's  command  the  judges  were  directed  to  discharge 
all  prisoners  for  Church  recusancy,  or  for  dispersing  popish  books, 
or  for  saying  Mass.  Upon  this,  great  numbers  of  priests  flocked 
into  England  ;  "  Mass  was  celebrated  openly  over  the  realm."* 
This  allowance  was  not  on  the  principle  of  toleration,  but  as  a 
matter  of  policy*  for  strengthening  the  royal  prerogatives ;  and 
for  building  up  a  party  against  the  Puritanic  principles.  Thus 
Popery  and  Prelacy  were  made  to  combine  their  energies  ;  and 
the  Puritans  were  persecuted  with  augmented  vigor.  "  The 
Puritans,"  says  Neale,  "  retired  to  the  plantations  in  America, 
and  Popery  came  in  like  an  armed  man." 

A  preacher  (Mr.  Knight),  in  a  sermon  before  the  University 
of  Oxford,  ventured  to  assert  the  right  of  the  people  to  resist  the 
sovereign  when  it  should  be  the  only  way  of  securing  their  lives, 
their  property,  or  the  rights  of  conscience.  He  was  arraigned  as 
a  criminal.  Parseus'  Commentary,  which  he  quoted  as  authority, 
was  publicly  burned  at  Oxford  and  at  London.  The  University 
of  Oxford,  in  full  convocation,  passed  a  decree  that  it  was  not 
lawful  for  a  subject  to  appear  offensively  in  arms  against  the 
kin£  on  the  score  of  religion,  or  on  any  other  account.  All 
graduates  of  the  University  were  required  to  subscribe  that 

*  Neale. 


184  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

decree ;  and  to  take  an  oath  that  they  would  ever  continue  of 
the  same  opinion.  Thus  it  was  attempted  to  bind  all  men  of 
learning  in  the  nation,  under  the  solemnities  of  an  oath,  always 
to  maintain  the  doctrine  of  passive  obedience  and  non-resistance. 

The  king  bethought  himself  of  another  device  to  check  the 
growth  of  Puritanism  ;  and  that  was  by  putting  down  the  ob- 
servance of  the  Lord's  day  as  a  Holy  Sabbath.  "  The  old  Puri- 
tans," says  Neale,  "  were  strict  observers  of  the  Christian 
Sabbath,  or  Lord's  day ;  spending  the  whole  of  it  in  acts  of 
public  and  private  devotion  and  charity."  *  *  "It  was  the 
distinguishing  mark  of  a  Puritan  in  these  times,  to  see  him  going 
to  church  twice  a  day,  with  his  Bible  under  his  arm ;  and  while 
others  were  at  plays  or  interludes,  at  revels,  or  walking  in  the 
fields,  or  at  the  diversions  of  bowling,  fencing,  &c.,  *  on 

the  evening  of  the  Sabbath,  these  with  their  families  were  em- 
ployed in  reading  the  Scriptures,  singing  psalms,  catechising 
the  children,"  &c.  As  early  as  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  a 
Dr.  Bound  had  published  a  book  maintaining  the  obligation  to 
keep  the  Lord's  day  as  a  Sabbath.  "  This  book  had  a  wonder- 
ful spread,  and  wrought  a  mighty  reformation  among  the  people  ; 
so  that  the  Lord's  day,  which  used  to  be  profaned  by  interludes, 
May  games,  morrice  dances,  and  other  sports  and  recreations," 
began  to  be  religiously  observed.  The  Puritans  all  embraced 
this  doctrine.  "  But  the  governing  clergy  exclaimed  against  it 
as  a  restraint  of  Christian  liberty ;  as  putting  an  unequal  lustre 
upon  Sunday,  and  tending  to  eclipse  the  authority  of  the 
Church  in  appointing  other  festivals."*  A  Mr.  Rogers,  author 
of  a  Commentary  on  the  39  Articles,  writes  in  his  Preface, 
"  That  it  was  the  comfort  of  his  soul,  and  would  be  to  his  dying 
day,  that  he  had  been  the  man  and  the  means,  that  the  Sabba- 
tarian errors  were  brought  to  the  light  and  knowledge  of  the 
state."!  "  Archbishop  Whitgift  called  in  all  copies  of  Dr. 
Bound's  book,  and  forbade  it  to  be  re-printed.  The  Lord  Chief 
Justice  Popham  did  the  same  ;  both  of  them  declaring  that  the 
Sabbath  doctrine  agreed  neither  with  our  Church,  nor  with  the 
laws  and  orders  of  this  kingdom.":):  Heylin  complains  that  the 
Puritans,  by  raising  the  Sabbath,  took  occasion  to  depress  the 
festivals ;  and  introduced  by  little  and  little  a  general  neglect  of 
the  weekly  fasts,  the  holy  time  of  Lent,  and  the  ember  days.§ 
"  Sad  indeed !"  exclaimed  Neale. 

To  save  people  from  the  infection  of  Puritanism,  but  under 
color  of  preserving  people  from  running  into  Popery  through  the 
austerity  of  the  reformed  religion,  James,  on  the  24th  of  May, 
1618,  published  his  BOOK  OF  SPORTS,  in  which  he  signified, 
"  That  for  his  good  people's  recreation,  his  majesty's  pleasure  was 
*  Neale.  t  Ibid.  JIbid.  §  Ibid. 


THE  STORM  GATHERING  IN  ENGLAND.  185 

that  they  should  not  be  disturbed,  letted,  or  discouraged  from 
any  such  harmless  recreations  ;  such  as  dancing,  either  of  men 
or  women  ;  archery  for  men,  leaping  or  vaulting,  or  any  such 
harmless  recreations ;  nor  having  of  May  poles,  or  other  sports 
therewith,  so  as  the  same  may  be  had  in  due  and  convenient 
time,  without  impediment  or  let  of  divine  service."  *  *  * 
Only  "  no  recusant  [Papist]  was  to  have  the  benefit  of  this 
declaration ;  nor  such  as  were  not  present  at  the  whole  divine 
service  ;  nor  such  as  did  not  keep  their  own  parish  churches ; 
i.  e.  the  Puritans."*  Though  this  was  aimed  at  the  Puritans,  it 
grieved  all  sober  Protestants  throughout  the  land.  Archbishop 
Abbot  absolutely  forbade  it  to  be  read  in  the  church  where  he 
was.  The  principles  of  Divine  truth  had  taken  too  deep  a  hold 
upon  the  conscience  of  the  nation  to  be  rooted  out  by  the 
mandate  of  an  absolute  king.  The  nation  was  now  alarmed 
lest  the  faithless  king  should  prepare  the  way  for  bringing  them 
once  more  under  the  dominion  of  Popery.  The  Elector  Pala- 
tine, who  had  married  Elizabeth,  the  daughter  of  James— from 
whom  the  present  race  of  English  sovereigns  is  descended — was 
driven  from  his  dominions,  and  had  to  take  refuge  in  Holland. 
The  whole  Protestant  world  murmured  at  James'  supineness,  both 
as  a  father  and  a  Protestant.  The  Commons  were  at  the  same 
time  indignant  at  this,  and  alarmed  at  the  engagements  into 
which  they  suspected  James  to  be  at  that  time  entering  with  the 
king  of  Spain  for  the  marriage  of  his  son  Charles  wilh  the  Span- 
ish Infanta.  James  had  indeed  entered  into  a  treaty,  in  which 
he  had  promised  either  to  annul  all  laws  against  Popery,  or  to 
prevent  their  execution.  He  had  provided  for  the  admission  of 
popish  priests  and  a  popish  bishop  with  the  Infanta ;  for  the 
erection  of  a  popish  chapel  with  all  the  paraphernalia  of  popish 
worship.  He  had  further  entered  into  engagements,  to  which 
Charles  his  son  had  sworn,  which  in  the  natural  course  of  things 
would  in  due  time  place  a  line  of  popish  sovereigns  upon  the 
throne.  Notwithstanding  these  engagements,  which  were  then 
secret,  James  had  assured  the  Parliament  "  on  the  word  of  a 
Christian  king,"  that  the  Spanish  match  was- — "  res  integra" — an 
affair  entirely  open  and  unfinished,  in  which  he  stood  "  not 
bound  nor  either  way  engaged,  but  remained  free  to  follow  what 
should  be  best  advised."  "  It  has  been  talked  of  my  remissness," 
said  he,  "and  a  suspicion  of  a  toleration"  [of  Popery]  "  but  as 
God  shall  judge  me,  I  never  thought  or  meant,  nor  ever  in  word 
expressed  anything  that  savored  of  it."  To  the  remonstrance  of 
Parliament,  James  answered,  "  I  wish  it  may  be  written  in  mar- 
ble, and  remain  to  posterity  as  a  mark  upon  me  when  I  shall 
swerve  from  my  religion  ;  for  he  that  dissembles  before  God  is 

*  Neale. 


186  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

not  to  be  trusted  with  men ;  I  protest  before  God  that  my  heart 
hath  bled  when  I  have  heard  of  the  increase  of  Popery.  *  * 
.1  will  order  the  laws  to  be  put  in  execution  against  popish  re- 
cusants, as  they  were  before  these  treaties;  for  the  laws  are  still 
in  being,  and  were  never  dispensed  with  by  me  ;  God  is 
my  judge  that  they  never  were  so  intended  by  me."  The 
king  did  break  off  the  Spanish  match;  but  he  forthwith  en- 
tered into  a  treaty,  with  similar  stipulations  in  favor  of  Popery, 
for  the  marriage  of  Charles  with  Henrietta  Maria,  sister  of  Louis 
XIII.  of  France.  "  Upon  this  occasion,  the  Archbishop  of  Am- 
brun  was  sent  into  England,  who  told  the  king  that  the  best  way 
to  accomplish  his  wishes  was  to  grant  a  full  toleration  to  the 
Catholics.  The  king  replied,  that  he  intended  it ;  and  was  will- 
ing to  have  an  assembly  of  divines  to  compromise  the  difference 
between  Protestants  and  Papists :  and  promised  to  send  a  letter 
to  the  pope  to  bring  him  into  the  project.  In  this  letter,  the  king 
styled  the  pope,  "  Christ's  Vicar,  and  Head  of  the  Church  uni- 
versal ;  and  assured  him  that  he  would  declare  himself  a  Catho- 
lic as  soon  as  he  could  provide  against  the  inconveniences  of 
such  a  declaration."*  The  treaty  was  made.  Ambrun  was 
permitted  to  administer  confirmation  to  thousands  of  Catholics 
at  the  door  of  the  French  Ambassador's  house. 

In  the  midst  of  these  transactions,  on  the  27th  of  March,  1625, 
James  was  summoned  away  by  death.  These  things  were 
transpiring  during  the  years  in  which  the  colony  at  Plymouth 
was  struggling  for  life.  From  the  midst  of  these  scenes  the  new 
accessions  to  that  colony  fled  from  their  native  land  to  the  wilder- 
ness of  New  England.  The  germs  of  the  events  in  the  next 
reign  were  now  planted.  A  conflict  was  at  hand  ;  it  could  not 
but  come  ;  a  conflict  between  the  principles  of  Church  Polity  as 
laid  down  by  the  "  Judicious  Hooker  ;"  united  with  a  theology 
half  Popish  and  half  Arminian  on  the  one  side ;  and  the  doctrine 
and  principles  of  Puritanism  on  the  other;  a  conflict  of  the 
Reformation  with  essential  Popery;  of  the  principles  of  freedom 
with  the  principles  of  despotism. 

*  Neale. 


XIV. 


REIGN  OF  KING  CHARLES  I. 

Reaching  for  a  union  of  Churchmen  and  Papists.  Charles — his  High- 
Church  and  High-Prerogative  notions.  Strafford.  Laud.  Huguenots 
of  Rochelle.  Book  of  the  King's  Chaplain.  King  and  Commons  appeal 
to  the  people.  Illegal  exactions.  The  Church  Clergy  side  with  tyran- 
ny. Overthrow  of  the  Constitution.  Cruelties  of  Laud. 

THE  reformers  and  the  Homilies  of  the  Church  of  England  had 
declared  concerning  the  Church  of  Rome,  that  for  "  nine  hun- 
dred and  odd  years,  *    *    the  state  thereof"  was  "  so  far  wide 
from  the  nature  of  the  true  Church,  that  nothing  can  be  more"* 
The  religion  of  Rome,  the  Homilies  declared  to  be  the  "  ungodly 
and  counterfeit  religion  ;f  and  the  Roman  Church  to  be  "  The 
idolatrous  Church;    *     *     a  foul,  filthy  old  withered  harlot;  the 
foulest  and  filthiest  that  ever  was  seen"\     The  new  theologians, 
among  whom  Laud  was  most  conspicuous,  were  now  fond  of 
acknowledging   the    Church    of  Rome,  not   simply  as   a  true 
Church,  a  beloved  sister,  but  as  a  MOTHER  !     The  English  reform- 
ers had  treated  the  reformed  Churches  on  the  continent  as  true 
Churches  ;  had  held  friendly  correspondence  with  them,  and  had 
received  their  ministers  as  authorized  and  ordained  ministers  of 
the  Church  of  Christ.     Laud  and  his  compeers  handed  over  all 
out  of  the  English  or  the  Papal  Church,  to  the  uncovenanted 
mercies  of  God.     "  Laud,"  says  Neale,  "  thought  there  was  no 
salvation  for  Protestants  out  of  the  Church  of  England."     His 
aim,  and  the  aim  of  those  of  like  sentiments,  was  now  to  make 
it  appear,  that  there  was,  in  the  essentials  of  faith,  no  difference 
between  the  Church  of  England  and  that  of  Rome  ;  and  to  seek 
for  a  union  of  Churchmen  and   Papists.     Could  the  true  Pro- 
testants in  the  nation  submit  to  this  ?     Could  the  friends  of  free- 
dom tamely  endure  the  yoke  of  despotism  that  was  sought  to  be 
fastened  on  their  necks  ?     The  contest  of  principle  had  already 
begun.     The  weak  and  foolish  attempts  of  James  to  play  the 
despot  had  roused  the  yeomanry  of  the  nation  to  a  spirit  of 
resistance,  against  which  such  attempts  could  be  safe  no  longer. 
*  2.  Homily  for  Whitsunday.        1 3.  Homily  on  Good  Works.        t  Ibid. 


188  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

At  this  juncture  of  affairs,  Charles  I.  came  to  the  throne  on  the 
27th  of  March,  1625,  a  little  more  than  four  years  after  the  land- 
ing of  the  Pilgrims  at  Plymouth. 

In  his  own  family  Charles  I.  was  a  most  amiable  man.  He 
was  possessed  of  ordinary  good  sense  ;  of  more  learning  than 
is  usual  in  a  prince  ;  he  was  a  writer  of  no  mean  style  or  capacity 
for  the  day.  Formal  and  stately  in  his  manners,  he  was  not, 
perhaps,  more  so  than  suited  the  notions  of  princely  dignity  at 
the  time.  His  temper  seems  to  have  been  mild  and  beneficent. 
Had  he  lived  a  century  earlier,  before  the  people  had  begun  to 
understand  their  rights,  or  a  century  later,  when  they  had  taught 
their  kings  to  respect  them,  Charles  I.  would  probably  have  been 
as  much  beloved  as  any  sovereign  that  ever  sat  on  the  English 
throne.  Few  of  those  sovereigns  have  maintained  so  good  a 
private  character,  or  have  been  blessed  with  so  beneficent  a  dis- 
position. "  But  the  high  idea  of  his  own  authority  which  he  im- 
bibed," says  Hume,  "  made  him  incapable  of  giving  way  to  the 
spirit  of  liberty  which  began  to  prevail  among  his  subjects." 
These  high  notions  of  the  regal  prerogatives,  Charles  had  learned 
from  his  father.  James  had  commended  to  him  the  great  work 
of  "  The  Judicious  Hooker,"  "  as  worthy  of  his  study,  even  next 
unto  the  Bible ;"  and  henceforth  the  support  of  High  Church 
principles  and  regal  prerogatives,  was  with  Charles  not  only  a 
matter  of  divine  right,  but  of  conscientious  duty.  When  these 
despotic  principles  were  about  to  lead  him  to  the  scaffold,  Charles 
in  his  turn  enjoined  it  upon  his  sons,  Charles  II.,  and  James  II., 
to  "  study  the  great  work  of  the  Judicious  Hooker,  even  next 
unto  the  Bible."  They  did  so,  and  followed  it  out  to  its  natural 
results  of  despotism  and  popery,  till  Charles  II.  died  a  papist, 
and  James  II.,  from  a  staunch  Churchman  of  the  Puseyistic 
stamp,  became  a  bigoted  papist,  and  from  the  "Judicious 
Hooker"  his  native  tyranny  received  that  conscience  and  boldness, 
which  ended  in  driving  this  last  of  the  Stuarts  from  the  throne.* 

*  James  himself  declares  that  reading  Heylin  and  "The  Preface  to  Hooker's 
Ecclesiastical  Polity,"  "  confirmed  him  in  the  opinion  "  "  that  those  who  changed 
the  English  religion  were  not  of  God."  On  the  principles  of  English  prelacy,  as 
laid  down  by  Hooker,  he  could  not  see  why  the  Church  of  England  should  separate 
from  Rome.  "  Submission"  says  James  II,  "is  necessary  to  the  peace  of  the  Church; 
and  when  every  man  will  expound  the  Scriptures,  this  makes  way  to  all  sects  who  pretend  to 
build  upon  it  " — (one  might  think  that  on  this  point  the  Bishop  of  Connecticut  had 
been  to  school  to  King  James  II.;  for  this  is  his  precise  objection  in  his  recent 
charge).  "  It  is  plain," continues  James  II.,  "that  the  Church  of  England  does  not 
pretend  to  infallibility  ;  yet  she  acted  as  if  she  did  ;  for  ever  since  the  Reformation 
she  has  persecuted  those  who  differed  from  her,  dissenters  as  well  as  papists,  more 
generally  than  was  known.  And  he  could  not  see  why  dissenters  might  not  sepa- 
rate from  the  Church  of  England,  as  well  as  she  had  done  from  the  Church  of 
Rome. — (Bishop  Burnet,  Hist  of  his  own  Life  and  Times.)  Bishop  Burnet  says  he 
had  this  account  of  James  IL's  change  of  religion  from  James  himself.  "  All  due 
care  was  taken,"  James  says,  "  to  form  him  to  a  strict  adherence  to  the  Church  of 
England ;  among  other  things  much  was  said  of  the  AUTHORITY  OF  THE  CHURCH, 


REIGN  OF  KING  CHARLES  1.  189 

The  chief  advisers  and  instruments  in  all  the  encroachments 
of  Charles  I.  upon  the  liberties  of  his  people,  were  THOMAS 
WENT  WORTH,  EARL  OF  STRAFFORD,  AND  LAUD,  who  succeeded 
to  the  supreme  management  of  ecclesiastical  affairs  upon  the  se- 
questration of  Archbishop  Abbot,  in  1627 ;  and  upon  the  death 
of  that  prelate,  became  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  in  1633. 

Thomas  Wentworth  had  signalized  himself  by  his  efforts 
against  the  royal  prerogatives.  Charles  understood  his  character, 
and  bought  him  up  with  office  and  a  patent  of  nobility.  From 
this  time,  fidelity  to  his  master  was  his  controlling  principle.  He 
regarded  no  rights,  no  constitutions,  but  bent  all  his  energies  to 
the  support  and  enlargement  of  the  royal  prerogatives. 

The  character  of  LAUD  appears  to  have  been  a  combination 
of  superstition,  bigotry,  intolerance,  and  ambition.  Hume  draws 
its  outlines  in  the  following  words  :  "  With  unceasing  industry, 
he  studied  to  exalt  the  priestly  and  prelatical  character.  His  zeal 
was  unrelenting  *  *  *  in  imposing  by  rigorous  meas- 

ures his  own  tenets  and  pious  ceremonies  on  the  obstinate  Puri- 
tans who  had  profanely  dared  to  oppose  him.  In  prosecution 
of  his  holy  purposes,  he  overlooked  every  human  consideration, 

*  *  *  all  his  enemies  were  imagined  by  him  the  declared 
enemies  of  loyalty  and  true  piety ;  and  every  exercise  of  his  an- 
ger, by  that  means,  became  in  his  eyes  a  merit  and  a  virtue. 
This  was  the  man  who  had  acquired  so  great  an  ascendant  over 
Charles ;  and  who  led  him  by  the  facility  of  his  temper,  into  a 
conduct  which  proved  fatal  to  himself,  and  to  his  kingdom." 

There  might  still  have  remained  some  bulwark  in  the  laws ; 
but  the  Lord  Chief  Justice  Finch  was  fond  of  declaring  "  that 
a  requisition  of  the  Council  or  Star-Chamber  should  always  be 
good  enough  law  for  him."  The  judges  held  their  offices  at  the 
pleasure  of  the  crown :  and  it  was  the  practice  of  Laud  to  send 
for  their  opinions  beforehand;  and  both  he  and  the  Star-Cham- 
ber  used  often  to  remind  the  judges,  that  if  they  should  not  do 
his  majesty's  business  to  his  satisfaction,  a  removal  from  office 

and  of  the  TRADITIONS  from  the  Apostles  IN  SUPPORT  OF  EPISCOPACY;  so  that 
when  he  came  to  observe  that  there  was  more  reason  to  submit  to  the  Catholic  Church  than 
to  any  one  particular  Church,  and  that  OTHER  TRADITIONS  might  be  taken  on  her  word, 
AS  WELT,  AS  EPISCOPACY  was  received  among  us,  he  thought  the  step  was  not  great, 
but  that  it  was  very  reasonable  to  go  over  to  Rome ;  and  Dr.  Seward  having  taught  him 
to  believe  a  REAL  but  inconceivable  PRESENCE  OF  Christ  in  the  sacrament,  he  thought 
this  went  more  than  halfway  to  TRANSUBSTANTIATION."  Here  we  have  the  process 
natural  as  life,  and  entirely  logical.  Can  we  wonder  that  the  Puseyites  are  going 
over  to  Rome  ?  Is  there  any  logical  ground  short  of  that,  on  which  High  Church- 
men can  rest?  To  suppose  that  the  incipient  principles  of  this  scheme  will  stop 
at  any  given  limit  short  of  essential  Popery,  is  as  contradictory  to  reason  as  it  is  to 
all  the  lessons  of  past  history.  There  is  a  natural  and  inevitable  logic,  by  which 
the  masses  will,  in  process  of  time,  push  out  first  principles  to  their  legitimate 
conclusions  It  is  impossible  that  High  Church  Episcopacy,  or  Puseyism,  should 
finally  rest  anywhere  short  of  essential  Popery. 


190  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

was  the  least  they  had  to  apprehend.  Whatever  soundness 
there  might  be  in  the  decisions  of  the  courts  on  other  subjects, 
there  was  none  in  any  matter  of  question  between  the  royal  pre- 
rogatives, the  edicts  of  the  Star-Chamber,  and  the  rights  and 
liberties  of  the  people. 

The  first  parliament  of  Charles  "  was  almost  entirely  govern- 
ed," says  Hume,  "by  a  set  of  men  of  the  most  uncommon  ca- 
pacity, and  the  largest  views."  Among  them,  were  Sir  Edward 
Coke,  Digges,  Elliot,  Wentworth  (afterwards  created  Earl  of 
Strafford),  Selden  and  Pym;  names  afterwards  so  conspicuous 
in  the  final  strusffle  for  freedom. 

oo 

These  men  had  stood  against  the  encroachments  of  James. 
They  saw  with  alarm  the  dangerous  assumptions  of  the  crown : 
and  they  determined  to  seize  upon  the  first  occasion,  when  the 
king  should  need  supplies,  to  reduce  his  enormous  prerogatives. 

The  nation  had  grown  into  a  horror  of  Popery  ;  yet  the  Roman 
titular  Bishop  of  Chalcedon  appeared  in  his  pontifical  robes  in 
Lancashire,  and  appointed  a  bishop,  vicar  general,  and  archdea- 
cons all  over  England.  The  king  made  fair  promises,  directly 
opposed  to  his  marriage  treaty  with  France ;  issued  his  procla- 
mation against  popish  recusants  ;  and  then  immediately  arrested, 
by  his  special  warrants,  the  course  of  the  laws  against  Popery. 

The  government  of  France  was  now  engaged  in  a  series  of 
massacres  for  exterminating  the  Huguenots  from  the  kingdom. 
The  Huguenots  had  gathered  and  stood  for  their  lives  in  the  town 
of  Rochelle.  The  Catholics  were  besieging  the  town,  but  being 
destitute  of  shipping  to  block  up  the  harbor,  the  French  min- 
ister, Cardinal  Richelieu,  applied  to  Charles  for  the  loan  of  some 
ships.  The  pretext  to  the  seamen  was,  that  they  were  to  be  em- 
ployed against  the  Genoese,  who,  being  allies  of  Spain,  were  re- 
garded with  dislike  by  France  and  England  both.  The  fleet  ar- 
rived on  the  coast  of  France,  when  the  sailors  learned  that  they 
were  to  fight  against  their  Protestant  brethren,  the  Huguenots  of 
Rochelle !  The  sailors  were  enraged.  They  drew  up  a  remon- 
strance to  their  commander,  signing  all  their  names  in  a  circle 
that  none  might  be  singled  out  as  ringleaders,  and  declared  that 
they  would  sooner  be  thrown  overboard,  or  be  hanged  at  the  top 
of  the  masts,  than  fight  against  their  Protestant  brethren.  This 
remonstrance  they  laid  under  the  admiral's  prayer-book.  It  was 
in  vain  that  the  admiral  and  the  French  officers  endeavored  to 
move  the  seamen  from  their  determination.  The  whole  squadron 
sailed  for  the  Downs.  Deception  was  now  added  to  authority; 
and  the  usual  terrors  employed  to  overawe  the  mutineers.  The 
seamen  were  assured  that  France  had  made  peace  with  the  Hu- 
guenots ;  and  were  persuaded  to  sail  once  more.  King  Charles 
sent  his  warrant  to  the  admiral:."  We  command  you,"  said  he, 


REIGN  OF  KING  CHARLES  I.  191 

"  to  consign  your  own  ship  immediately  into  the  hands  of  the 
French  admiral,  with  all  her  equipage,  artillery,  &c.,  and  require 
the  other  seven  to  put  themselves  into  the  service  of  our  dear 
brother,  the  French  king ;  and  in  case  of  backwardness  or  refusal, 
we  command  you  to  use  all  forcible  means,  even  to  their  sinking." 
Arrived  once  more  at  Dieppe,  the  sailors  discovered  the  deception. 
Sir  Ferdinando  Gorges,  who  commanded  one  of  the  vessels, 
broke  through  and  returned  to  England.  All  the  officers  and 
sailors  of  the  other  ships  deserted.  "  One  gunner  alone,"  says 
Hume,  "  preferred  duty  to  his  king  to  the  cause  of  religion ;  and 
he  was  afterward  killed  in  charging  a  cannon  before  Rochelle." 
The  French  manned  the  ships  with  sailors  of  their  own  religion  ; 
blocked  up  the  harbor  ;  destroyed  the  little  fleet  of  the  Rochellers  ; 
cut  off  their  communication  with  their  Protestant  friends  by  sea ; 
reduced  them  to  a  dreadful  famine ;  took  the  last  bulwark  of  the 
Protestant  interest  in  France ;  and  overwhelmed  its  inhabitants 
in  butchery  and  blood.  Great  was  the  indignation  of  the  Protes- 
tant people  of  England  ;  and  long  and  bitterly  was  this  transac- 
tion remembered  against  their  king. 

One  of  the  king's  chaplains  (Mr.  Montague)  published  a  book 
in  which,  as  well  as  in  other  writings  of  his,  he  maintained  "  that 
the  Church  of  Rome  is,  and  ever  was,  a  true  Church ;  and  had 
ever  remained  firm  upon  the  same  foundation  of  sacraments  and 
doctrines  instituted  by  God ;  that  the  doctrinal  faith  of  Rome  and 
of  England  is  the  same ;  that  images  are  lawful  for  the  instruc- 
tion of  the  ignorant,  and  for  exciting  devotion  ;  that  saints  are  to 
be  invoked  in  prayer,  as  having  patronage  and  custody  and  power 
over  certain  persons  and  countries." 

The  Commons  cited  the  author  to  their  bar;  a  proceeding  not 
uncommon  in  those  days,  however  strange  it  appears  now,  when 
men  are  held  answerable  for  their  deeds,  not  to  the  legislature, 
but  to  the  courts ;  and  are  liable  to  be  deprived  of  their  property 
or  freedom,  not  by  the  mere  votes  of  a  legislature,  but  only  after 
trial  and  sentence  according  to  law.* 

The  Commons  having  cited  Montague  to  their  bar,  LAUD 
defended  his  doctrines,  and  asserted  the  prerogatives  of  the 
ecclesiastical  courts.  The  king  expressed  his  displeasure  with 
the  Commons,  and  dissolved  the  Parliament. 

As  this  was  before  Parliament  had  voted  any  supplies,  Charles 
endeavored  to  supply  his  want  by  compulsory  loans.  But  this 
did  not  relieve  his  necessities,  while  it  greatly  increased  the  rising 
discontent  of  the  people.  Forced  to  call  another  Parliament,  he 

*  This  arbitrary  manner  of  proceeding  seems  to  have  been  not  uncommon,  at 
least  down  to  the  time  when  the  Colonial  Assembly  of  Massachusetts  voted  that 
James  Franklin  (brother  of  Benjamin  Franklin)  "should  no  longer  print  the  news- 
paper called  the  New  England  Courant." — Franklin's  Life. 


192  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

named  the  popular  leaders  of  the  last  Parliament  as  sheriffs  of 
counties,  in  order  to  disqualify  them  for  holding  seats  in  the  Par- 
liament. The  people  saw  this  policy;  and  Parliament,  when 
they  met,  entered  upon  a  redress  of  grievances  with  increased 
resolution.  They  impeached  the  king's  favorite  minister,  the 
Duke  of  Buckingham.  The  king  sent,  them  his  commands  not 
to  meddle  with  his  servant  Buckingham ;  but  to  finish  in  a  few 
days  the  bill  for  his  supplies,  and  to  increase  the  amount,  or 
they  must  not  expect  to  sit  any  longer.  If  they  should  fail  in 
this,  he  threatened  to  try  other  counsels. 

The  Commons  proceeded  in  their  own  course.  By  the  king's 
command,  two  leading  members,  Sir  Dudley  Digges  and  Sir 
John  Elliott,  were  thrown  into  prison.  The  Commons  refused 
to  proceed  to  any  other  business  till  this  breach  of  their  privileges 
should  be  redressed.  The  king  yielded  ;  but  the  effect  of  all  this 
was  greatly  to  exasperate  the  Parliament,  and  to  expose  to  the  na- 
tion, the  tyranny,  indiscretion  and  irresolute  character  of  the  king. 

The  Commons  now  entered  upon  the  favor  shown  to  Popery. 
They  complained  that  the  laws  were  dishonored,  the  king's 
promises  violated,  popish  doctrines  honored  and  defended,  and 
Papists  exalted  to  stations  of  honor  and  authority  around  the 
king.  Charles  made  known  his  determination  to  cut  all  this 
short  by  a  dissolution  of  Parliament.  The  peers  interceded ; 
reminded  him  that  the  unfinished  business,  and  the  state  of  the 
nation,  demanded  that  Parliament  should  sit  a  little  longer. 
"  Not  a  moment  longer,"  cried  the  king,  and  dissolved  the  Par- 
liament. 

The  Commons  foreseeing  this,  had  taken  care  to  finish  and 
disperse  their  remonstrance,  in  justification  of  their  conduct  to 
the  pedple.  The  king  likewise  published  his  declaration,  giving 
the  reasons  of  his  dissolving  the  Parliament  before  they  had  had 
time  to  conclude  any  one  act.  Thus  were  the  king  and  Parlia- 
ment at  issue  on  the  great  questions  of  popular  rights,  in  an 
appeal  to  the  great  inquest  of  the  nation,  THE  SOVEREIGN  PEOPLE. 
Little  did  Charles  dream  of  the  virtual  admission  contained  in 
that  appeal.  Little  did  he  understand  its  tendencies,  or  antici- 
pate its  results.  The  people  were  now  called  upon  to  investigate 
for  themselves  the  great  question  of  rights  ;  and  to  judge 
between  the  Parliament  and  the  king!  Who  should  carry  into 
execution  the  award  of  the  sovereign  people  ?  It  could  not  be 
done  as  with  us,  peaceably  at  the  ballot-box  :  unless  one  party 
should  voluntarily  yield,  it  must  await  the  decision  of  the  sword. 

The  king  now  tried  his  threatened  "  New  Counsels  "  for  replen- 
ishing his  exchequer.  He  established  a  commission  for  com- 
pounding with  the  Papists  for  a  dispensation  of  the  laws  against 
them.  He  demanded  aid  of  the  nobility.  He  demanded 


REIGN  OF   KING  CHARLES  I.  193 

d£100,000  of  the  city  of  London ;  and  the  good  city  of  London 
gave  him  a  flat  refusal.  He  required  the  maritime  towns  and 
adjacent  counties  to  furnish,  equip,  and  arm,  each,  an  appointed 
number  of  ships.  This  was  the  first  appearance  of  ship  money  in 
the  reign  of  Charles.  Little  did  he  foresee  the  troubles  that  were 
to  rise  from  this  exaction.  He  laid  taxes  on  his  people  and  re- 
quired the  money  under  the  name  of  loans.  Whoever  failed  to 
make  the  contribution  at  which  he  was  assessed,  was  taken  from 
his  house,  carried  to  a  distance  and  thrown  into  prison.  Among 
other  articles  of  secret  instruction,  direction  was  given  to  the 
commissioners  appointed  to  levy  these  loans,  says  Hume,  "  Thai 
if  any  shall  refuse  to  lend,  and  shall  make  delays  and  excuses, 
and  shall  persist  in  his  obstinacy  ;  they  should  examine  him 
upon  oath,  whether  he  has  been  dealt  with  to  deny  or  refuse  to 
lend,  or  to  make  an  excuse  for  not  lending;  who  has  dealt  with 
him,  and  what  speeches  or  persuasions  were  used  to  that  pur- 
pose ;  and  they  also  shall  charge  any  such  person,  in  his  majesty's 
name,  upon  his  allegiance,  not  to  disclose  to  any  one  what  his 
answer  was.  So  violent  an  inquisitorial  power,  so  impracticable 
attempt  at  secresy,"  continues  Hume,  "  were  the  objects  of  in- 
dignation, and  even,  in  some  degree,  of  ridicule." 

To  support  this  law,  the  Church  clergy  were  employed  to 
preach  up  the  doctrine  of  passive  obedience  and  Non-Resistance. 
One  Sibthorpe  preached  at  the  Lent  assizes  at  Northampton, 
"  That  if  princes  commanded  anything  which  subjects  might  not 
perform,  because  it  is  against  the  laws  of  God,  or  of  nature,  or 
impossible ;  yet  subjects  are  bound  to  undergo  the  punishment 
without  resistance  or  railing  or  reviling  ;  and  so  to  yield  a  passive 
obedience  where  they  could  not  yield  an  active  one."  Dr.  Man- 
waring  preached,  that  "  the  Royal  will  and  pleasure  of  the  king, 
in  imposing  taxes  without  consent  of  parliament,  doth  oblige 
the  subject's  conscience  on  pain  of  damnation ;.  and  that  those 
who  refuse  obedience,  transgress  the  laws  of  God,  insult  the 
king's  supreme  authority,  and  are  guilty  of  impiety,  disloyalty 
and  rebellion  ;  that  in  cases  of  emergency  all  property  belongs 
to  the  king;  and  of  that  emergency  the  king  alone  is  the  sole 
and  irresponsible  judge.*  These  were  the  doctrines  of  the  court, 
and  of  the  high  churchmen.  Manwaring's  sermon  was  printed 
by  special  command  of  the  king.  Sibthorpe  dedicated  his  ser- 
mon to  the  king,  and  carried  it  to  the  old  Archbishop  Abbot  to 
be  licensed  for  the  press.  "  Abbot's  principles  of  liberty,"  says 
Hume,  "  had  acquired  him  the  character  of  a  Puritan.  For  it  is 
remarkable  that  this  party  made  the  privileges  of  the  nation  as 
much  a  part  of  their  religion,  as  the  Church  party  did  the  pre- 
rogatives of  the  crown."  Abbot  refused  to  grant  such  doctrines 

*  Hume. 
13 


194  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  seal  of  his  license.  The  sermon  was  carried  to  Laud,  then 
Bishop  of  London,  who  not  only  licensed  it,  but  recommended 
it  as  "  a  sermon  learnedly  and  discreetly  preached,  agreeable  to 
the  ancient  doctrine  of  the  established  Church,  *  *  and 

to  the  established  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England."  For  his 
refusal,  Archbishop  Abbot  was  "  suspended  from  the  exercise 
of  his  office,  banished  from  London,  and  confined  to  one  of  his 
country  seats."  His  jurisdiction  was,  by  commission,  put  into 
the  hands  of  five  bishops,  of  which  the  chief  was  the  aspiring 
Laud. 

The  people  imprisoned  for  refusing  the  forced  loan,  had  in 
general  submitted  in  hopeless  silence.  But  now  there  were  five 
men,  among  whom  was  Hampden,  who  ventured  to  demand  re- 
lease, not  as  a  favor  of  the  crown,  but  as  due  by  the  laws  of  their 
country.  This  was  a  bold  and  novel  proceeding.  "  Though 
rebellious  subjects  had  frequently,"  says  Hume,  "  in  the  open 
field  resisted  the  king's  authority ;  no  person  had  been  found  so 
bold,  while  confined,  and  at  mercy,  to  set  himself  in  opposition 
to  regal  power,  and  to  claim  the  protection  of  the  Constitution 
against  the  will  of  the  sovereign."  These  men  demanded  their 
release.  "  No  crime,  no  cause  is  assigned  as  the  reason  of  our 
commitment,"  said  they.  "  We  are  imprisoned  only  by  the  spe- 
cial command  of  the  king  and  council;  and  by  law,  this  is  not 
sufficient  reason  for  refusing  bail  or  releasement." 

The  judges  remanded  them  to  prison,  and  refused  the  offer- 
ed bail.  The  discussion  of  the  question  of  law,  and  of  the  rights 
of  the  subject,  spread  light,  and  excited  inquiry  among  the  peo- 
ple. Deep  were  the  murmurings  that  spoke  the  popular  discon- 
tent. Is  it  so  ?  said  the  people.  May  the  king  demand  our  pro- 
perty at  his  pleasure ;  the  divines  proclaim  eternal  wrath  upon 
our  refusal;  and  the  judges  condemn  us  to  spend  the  present 
life  in  perpetual  imprisonment?  Then  what  is  our  freedom? 
How  does  our  condition  differ  from  that  of  slaves  ? 

The  king  pursued  the  "  other  measures  "  which  he  had  threat- 
ened. He  quartered  his  soldiers  upon  private  families;  and 
whoever  had  paid  the  loan  reluctantly  and  with  delay,  was  sure 
to  have  his  house  filled  with  these  compulsory  and  lawless  guests. 
People  of  low  condition,  who  refused,  were  pressed  into  the 
army  or  navy.  Men  of  a  higher  class  were  sent  abroad  on  the 
king's  business,  to  the  ruin  of  their  own  affairs.  The  soldiers 
quartered  upon  the  people,  were  left  unpaid ;  and,  after  being 
tempted  or  driven  to  a  course  of  plunder  and  outrage,  were  sub- 
jected to  the  rigors  of  martial  law. 

Laud  and  his  creatures  stood  censors  of  the  press.  Books 
against  Arminianism  were  mutilated  or  forbidden  :  books  in  its 
favor  were  licensed  and  commended.  If  any  wrote  in  defence 


REIGN  OF  KING  CHARLES  I.  195 

of  the  liberties  of  the  people,  they  were  questioned  in  the  Star- 
Chamber,  or  fined  by  the  High  Commission.  Apologies  for 
Popery,  and  books  and  tracts  inculcating  popish  tenets  or  rituals, 
were  licensed ;  if  any  ventured  to  write  on  the  other  side, — the 
queen  was  a  Catholic ;  and  she  must  not  be  insulted  by  any- 
thing disrespectful  to  her  religion. 

The  king's  wants  compelled  him  at  length  to  call  another 
parliament.  They  came — "  men  deputed  from  boroughs  and 
counties,  inflamed  by  the  violations  of  liberty."  Many  of  the 
members  had  themselves  been  cast  into  prison,  and  had  other- 
wise suffered  by  the  measures  of  the  court.  They  were  men 
who  had  had  occasion  to  examine,  with  some  interest,  the  great 
question  of  right ;  men  of  independence  and  spirit :  and,  says 
Hume,  "  possessed  of  such  riches  that  their  property  was  com- 
puted to  surpass  three  times  that  of  the  House  of  Peers."  It 
was  to  these  men  that  the  king  ventured,  in  his  opening  speech, 
to  address  the  language  of  threats  ; — •"  If  they  should  not  supply 
his  wants,  he  should  use  other  means  which  God  and  nature  had 
put  into  his  hands."  "  Take  not  this  for  a  threatening,"  added 
the  king,  "  for  I  scorn  to  threaten  any  but  my  equals." 

The  Commons  were  not  alarmed.  Cool,  wary,  and  determin- 
ed, they  went  to  the  discharge  of  their  duties  in  their  own  way. 
"  Nothing,"  says  Hume,  "  can  give  us  a  higher  idea  of  the  capa- 
city of  those  men  who  now  guided  the  Commons,  and  of  the 
great  authority  which  they  had  acquired,  than  the  forming  and 
executing  so  judicious  and  so  difficult  a  plan  of  operations"  as 
that  which  they  carried  into  execution.  It  was  in  that  house  that 
Sir  Francis  Seymour  stood  up,  and  debated  the  question  "  whe- 
ther all  they  had  was  the  king's  by  divine  right."  Sycophant 
preachers  might  teach  that  doctrine  and  receive  bishoprics  as 
their  reward  ;  "  but  he  is  not  a  good  subject, — he  is  a  slave,  who 
will  allow  his  goods  to  be  taken  from  him  against  his  will ;  and 
his  liberty,  against  the  laws  of  the  kingdom." 

It  was  there  that  Sir  Robert  Phillips  stood  up  and  declared, 
that  "  Amongst  the  old  Romans,  once  every  year,  even  slaves 
had  liberty  to  speak  their  minds.  The  grievances  of  which  I 
complain,"  said  he,  "  I  draw  under  two  heads ;  acts  of  power 
against  law,  and  judgments  of  law  against  our  liberty.  What 
is  this  billeting  of  soldiers  upon  us  in  time  of  peace  for  a  punish- 
ment ?  Yet,  I  can  live,  though  another,  who  has  no  right,  be 
put  in  to  live  with  me.  But  to  have  my  liberty,  which  is  the 
soul  of  my  life,  ransacked  from  me  ;  to  have  my  person  shut  up 
in  jail  without  relief  by  law  ;  if  this  be  our  state,  why  talk 
about  liberties  ?"  Even  Sir  Thomas  Wentworth,  the  future  apos- 
tate Earl  of  Strafford,  could  open  his  mouth  for  liberty.  "  We 
must  vindicate  ;" — said  he,  "  What  ?  New  things  ?  No !  our  an- 


196  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

eient,  legal,  vital  liberties."  It  was  not  long  before  the  royal 
benefactions  and  favor  leagued  that  same  Wentworth  with  the 
aspiring  Laud,  in  a  contest  whose  only  issue  was  the  over- 
throw of  all  liberty,  or  the  overthrow  of  the  crown. 

The  Commons  framed  a  Petition ;  not  a  petition  for  Grace— 
but  a  PETITION  OF  RIGHT  ;  security  against  arbitrary  and  illegal 
imprisonment ;  against  the  royal  denial  of  a  Habeas  Corpus ; 
against  the  imposition  of  taxes,  loans,  or  benevolences,  without 
act  of  Parliament;  against  the  penalty  of  life,  or  limb,  or  exile, 
inflicted  on  any  man  without  the  verdict  of  his  peers. 

The  king  tried  evasions  :  he  gave  equivocal  answers.  But  the 
Commons  were  neither  to  be  daunted  nor  foiled.  They  proceeded 
against  Man  waring.  The  Lords  passed  sentence.  He  was  fined 
and  suspended.  On  his  knees,  at  the  bar  of  the  House,  he  was 
compelled  to  crave  pardon  of  God,  the  king,  the  Parliament,  and 
the  commonwealth.  Yet  no  sooner  was  the  session  ended,  than 
Manwaring  received  the  king's  pardon  ;  was  promoted  to  a  rich 
living ;  made  a  dean  ;  and  in  due  time  a  bishop.  Sibthorpe  also 
received  his  measure  of  reward ;  arid  Montague,  who  still  lay 
under  censure  of  Parliament,  was  made  a  bishop. 

Thus,  in  the  very  face  of  the  Parliament,  did  Charles  avow  his 
determination  to  defend  and  reward  the  public  maintenance  of 
principles  incompatible  with  a  limited  government,  or  with  the 
Protestant  faith.  The  people  were  already  goaded  to  madness, 
and  thus  he  mocked  and  defied  them. 

The  Commons  proceeded  to  censure  the  conduct  of  Bucking- 
ham. The  king  in  anger  sent  them  a  message,  which  he  was 
soon  after  glad  to  soften  and  retract: — forbidding  them  to  enter 
upon  any  new  business;  and  to  let  his  servant  and  his  govern- 
ment alone.  Such  messages  raised  the  Commons  to  a  sterner 
tone.  The  king  was  glad  to  calm  the  rising  storm  by  coming  to 
the  House  of  Lords,  and  giving  his  full  sanction  and  authority  to 
the  Petition  of  Right.  The  House  rang  with  acclamations  of  joy. 
The  notes  of  joy  resounded  throughout  the  nation.  But  the  king 
did  it  with  a  hollow  heart :  and  coming  years  showed  him  as  false 
as  he  was  despotic.  Restrained  by  no  allowance  of  rights,  and 
by  no  sense  of  justice,  he  could  be  bound  by  no  promises  or  en- 
gagements. Nothing  remained  for  the  people  but  resistance  or 
slavery ;  and  when  the  king  was  overthrown,  his  known  princi- 
ples forbade  his  conquerors  to  hope  for  any  security  but  in  his 
death. 

When  the  Parliament  met,  January  20,  1629,  after  their  pro- 
rogation, they  found  that  all  the  copies  of  the  Petition  of  Right 
which  were  dispensed,  had  annexed  to  them,  by  the  king's  orders, 
his  first  evasive  and  unsatisfactory  answer.  In  this  dishonest 
manner,  Charles  had  endeavored  to  trifle  with  his  own  engage- 


REIGN  OP  KING  CHARLES  I.  197 

ments,  and  to  deceive  the  people.  Selden  complained  to  the 
House,  that,  contrary  to  that  Petition,  one  man  had  already  been 
arbitrarily  punished  by  the  Star-Chamber,  with  the  loss  of  his 
ears.  The  king  had  illegally  continued  to  exact  the  duties  of  ton- 
nage and  poundage,  which  Parliament  had  not  granted  him. 
Oliver  Cromwell  was  in  that  Parliament,  as  yet  a  young  man, 
unknown  to  fame.  As  head  of  a  committee,  he  reported  to  the 
House,  concerning  the  countenance  given  to  divines,  who  preached 
Arminianism,  contrary  to  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England ; 
and  "  others  who  preached  flat  Popery"  He  also  called  the  at- 
tention of  the  House  to  the  favors  shown  to  Montague  and  Man- 
waring,  who  had  been  censured  in  the  last  session  of  Parlia- 
ment. "  If  this  be  the  way  to  Church  preferment,"  said  Oliver, 
"  what  may  we  not  expect  ?"  Angry  speeches  were  made  against 
the  new  ceremonies  which  Laud  had  begun  to  introduce  into  the 
Church ;  and  against  the  images  of  saints,  and  angels,  crucifixes, 
and  lighted  candles,  and  things  of  that  sort.  Mr.  Rouse  stood 
up  and  said,  "  I  desire  it  may  be  considered  what  new  paintings 
have  been  laid  upon  the  old  face  of  the  Whore  of  Babylon  to 
make  her  more  lovely."  Pym  referred  not  only  to  the  Articles, 
but  to  the  catechism  of  Edward  VI. ;  to  the  constant  profession 
of  the  reformers  and  martyrs;  to  the  Lambeth  articles,  which 
King  James  sent  to  the  Synod  of  Dort,  as  the  doctrines  of  the 
Church  of  England ;  all  showing  that  this  compound  of  Armi- 
nianism and  Popery  now  introduced  by  Laud  and  the  new 
bishops,  is  a  fundamental  departure  from  the  Church  of  England. 
Parliament  established  the  fixed  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land dragging  them  out  from  the  corruptions  of  Rome.  They 
stand  on  the  authority  of  Parliament ;  let  Parliament  now  rescue 
the  same  from  Rome  once  more.  Sir  John  Elliott  said,  "  If  there 
is  any  difference  concerning  the  interpretation  of  the  39  Articles, 
it  is  said  that  the  bishops  and  clergy  have  power  to  dispute  it, 
and  order  it  which  way  they  please :  grant  this  to  our  present 
bishops,  and  our  religion  is  overthrown."  The  Commons  passed 
the  following  vote  :  "  We,  the  Commons  in  Parliament  assem- 
bled, do  claim,  protest  and  avouch  for  ihe  truth,  the  sense  of  the 
Articles  which  were  established  by  Parliament  in  the  13th  year  of 
our  late  Queen  Elizabeth,  which,  by  public  act  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  by  the  general  current  and  exposition  of  the  writers 
of  our  Church,  have  been  delivered  unto  us.  And  we  reject  the 
sense  of  the  Jesuits  and  Arminians,  and  all  others  that  differ 
from  us." 

Whether  it  was  within  the  province  of  Parliament  to  interpret 
the  Articles  of  Religion,  is  a  question  which  we  need  not  stop  to 
discuss.  Parliament  had  established  the  Articles ;  and  these  Arti- 
cles had  become  a  part  of  the  fundamental  law  of  the  realm. 


198  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Was  Parliament  to  look  tamely  on  while  the  king  was  subverting 
one  part  of  the  constitution,  and  the  bishops  another ;  and  carry- 
ing the  nation  back  into  the  chains  both  of  a  secular  and  an  eccle- 
siastical despotism  ? 

Much  has  been  said  of  late,  of  the  "  Fences  "  with  which  the 
Episcopal  Church  is  guarded.  But  with  those  same  fences,  and 
by  means  of  the  very  principles  which  they  involve,  the  Chris- 
tian world  had  sunk  into  the  arms  of  a  pestilent  and  anti-Chris- 
tian superstition ;  and  had  groaned  under  the  iron  hand  of  a 
spiritual  despotism  during  a  dark  night  of  a  thousand  years. 
These  fences,  of  decrees,  canons,  liturgies,  ceremonials,  and  pre- 
latical  prerogatives,  had  proved  the  sturdiest  foes  that  the  Refor- 
mation had  to  encounter.  The  people  everywhere  would  have 
embraced  the  truth  with  alacrity,  had  they  been  free ;  but  these 
"fences"  seemed  equally  efficient  to  keep  in  darkness,  and  to 
keep  out  light.  The  Church  of  England  was  going  post-haste 
to  Rome.  The  sturdy  resistance  of  the  Puritans,  under  God, 
alone  prevented  it.  That  same  compound  of  Arminianism  and 
Popery,  which  is  now  spreading  and  prevailing  under  the  name 
of  Puseyism  (only  at  that  time  it  was  more  manfully  develop- 
ed), had  taken  an  absolute  possession  of  the  high  places  of  the 
Church  of  England.  Hume  has  well  said,  that  "  Throughout 
the  nation"  the  advocates  of  this  system  "  lay  under  the  reproach 
of  innovation  and  heresy" 

The  advocates  of  the  original  and  manifest  sense  of  the  Arti- 
cles, were  silenced  by  authority.  From  that  day,  the  mass  of  the 
Episcopal  clergy  have  gone  away  from  the  system  of  the  39  Arti- 
cles, over  to  Arminianism.  In  the  hands  of  a  hierarchy,  who 
had  departed  from  the  simplicity  of  Christ,  these  u  fences "  of 
liturgies,  offices,  and  articles,  became  as  straws ;  while  to  their 
hapless  flocks,  the  same  fences  became  barriers  to  pen  them  up 
helpless,  and  without  power  of  flight,  to  the  embrace  of  raven- 
ing wolves. 

The  Parliament  proceeded  in  their  work  of  vindicating  the 
liberties  of  Englishmen.  They  summoned  to  their  bar  some 
officers  who  had  seized  the  goods  of  sundry  merchants  and  who 
had  taken  one  of  these  merchants  from  the  House  of  Commons, 
of  which  he  was  a  member,  and  locked  him  up  in  prison,  for 
refusing  to  pay  duties  imposed  without  the  authority  of  law. 
The  king  sent  word  to  the  Commons,  that  what  his  servants  had 
done,  was  by  his  special  command ;  and  he  himself  took  the  re- 
sponsibility. In  a  contest  with  the  king  about  his  right  to  lay 
taxes  without  law,  the  House  was  dissolved :  but  not  before  they 
had  passed  their  remonstrance  by  acclamation ;  and  declared 
every  person  "  who  should  introduce  Popery  or  Arminianism,  or 
advise  the  king  to  levy  the  subsidies  of  tonnage  and  poundage 


REIGN  OF  KING   CHARLES  I.  -199 

without  consent  of  Parliament ;  or  who  should  voluntarily  pay 
the  same, — A  BETRAYER  OF   THE  LIBERTIES  OF  ENGLAND,  AND 

AN    ENEMY    OF    THE    SAME." 

The  king  committed  the  leaders  of  the  Commons  to  prison. 
Others  were  brought  to  trial,  in  the  king's  bench,  for  seditious 
speeches  in  Parliament.  Refusing  to  answer  in  a  lower  court, 
for  their  conduct  in  a  superior,  they  were  heavily  fined,  and  sen- 
tenced to  imprisonment  during  the  king's  pleasure.  Sir  John 
Elliott  was  confined  till  he  died  a  martyr  to  the  liberties  of  his 
country.  Even  then  the  people  murmured  vengeance  upon 
Laud,  the  prime  minister  and  adviser  of  these  outrages. 

The  Parliament  having  proved  so  troublesome,  Charles  deter- 
mined that  he  would  never  call  a  parliament  more,  and  published 
his  determination,  adding  a  threat  against  any  person  who  should 
presume  to  urge  or  advise  him  to  the  contrary.  As  to  tonnage 
and  poundage,  and  other  duties  levied  without  consent  of  Par- 
liament, he  declared  that  he  neither  could  nor  would  dispense 
with  them. 

He  tried  the  plan  of  purchasing  off  the  popular  leaders  with 
wealth,  office,  and  letters  of  nobility.  With  Thomas  Wentworth 
he  succeeded,  who  became  a  baron,  a  viscount,  and  then  Earl 
of  Strafford.  All  his  talents,  body  and  soul,  he  sold  to  the 
work  of  rendering  his  master  an  arbitrary  and  absolute  king. 

For  twelve  long  years  the  English  Constitution  was  at  an  end. 
Laud  and  Strafford  led  on  the  king  to  every  lawless  act  of  oppres- 
sion. The  king's  will  was  law.  His  proclamations  took  the 
place  of  enactments  of  Parliament.  Every  man's  property, 
liberty,  and  life,  lay  at  the  mercy  of  the  king  and  his  rapacious 
ministers.  They  levied  duties  of  tonnage  and  poundage  ;  and 
whatever  other  illegal  imposts  they  thought  proper.  They  laid 
taxes  on  "  soap,  candles,  wine,  cards,  pins,  leather,  coals,"  and  so 
on  to  the  end.  They  sold  monopolies  "  for  gauging  red-herring 
barrels,  and  butter  casks  *  *  for  marking  iron  and  sealing 
lace,"  even  down  to  the  monopoly  of  "  gathering  rags !''  They 
levied  ship  money ;  and  of  the  times,  and  the  amount,  the  king 
was  made  sole  judge.  They  demanded  "  coat  and  conduct 
money"  for  the  army  ;  they  billeted  soldiers  upon  private  fami- 
lies. They  exacted  loans  and  benevolences  ;  they  compounded 
for  nuisances  and  pretended  encroachments  ;  they  put  many  to 
death  by  martial  law,  who  should  have  been  tried  by  the  laws  of 
the  land."  Indeed,  what  did  they  not  do  ?  Fines,  imprisonments, 
cropping  of  ears,  slitting  of  noses,  and  whatever  outrages  may  be 
committed  by  unbridled  and  irresponsible  power,  rendered  Eng- 
land for  a  long  time  as  intolerable  a  despotism  as  Turkey.  "  Such 
was  the  calamity  of  the  times,  that  no  man  might  call  anything 
his  own,  longer  than  the  king  pleased ;  or  might  speak  or  write 


200  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

against  these  proceedings  without  the  utmost  hazard  of  his  liberty 
or  estate."  For  twelve  long  years  the  nation  endured  these 
things  ;  and  long  might  be  the  time  filled  up  with  narrating  the 
details  of  these  heart-rending  cruelties.  When  I  read  the  history 
of  these  things,  I  cannot  wonder  that  Charles,  with  the  two 
ministers  of  his  iniquities,  Strafford  and  Laud,  were  made  to  atone 
to  the  injured  people  of  England  for  their  violated  laws  and  Con- 
stitution. Upon  what  principle  of  justice  or  decency  is  it,  that 
the  Church  of  England  celebrates  that  tyrant  as  a  "martyr;" 
and  that  Laud,  the  heartless  pander  of  his  crimes,  is  "sainted" 
as  England's 

"  Holiest  man !" 

Take  a  specimen  or  two  of  the  tender  mercies  of  Laud.  Dr. 
Alexander  Leighton,  a  Scots  divine,  and  father  of  the  excellent 
archbishop  of  that  name,  had  ventured  to  write  against  the 
hierarchy,  a  work  which  he  entitled  "  Zion's  plea  against  Prela- 
cy" He  was  brought  into  the  Star- Chamber,  sentenced  to  be 
pilloried,  whipped,  his  ears  cut  off,  his  nose  slit,  to  be  branded  in 
the  face  with  a  hot  iron,  fined  £10,000,  and  then  to  lie  in  the 
Fleet  prison  for  life.  When  this  sentence  was  pronounced,  Laud 
pulled  off  his  cap  and  gave  God  thanks  for  it ;  and  when  it  was 
executed,  he  recorded  it  thus  in  his  private  diary  :  "  1st.  He  was 
severely  whipped  before  he  was  put  in  the  pillory.  2d.  Being 
set  in  the  pillory  he  had  one  of  his  ears  cut  off.  3d.  One  side  of 
his  nose  slit.  4th.  Branded  on  the  cheek  with  a  red-hot  iron, 
with  the  letters  S.  S.  [sower  of  sedition].  *  *  *  "On  that  day 
seven-night,  his' sores  upon  his  back,  ears,  nose,  and  face,  being 
not  yet  cured,  he  was  whipped  again  at  the  pillory  in  Cheapside, 
and  had  the  remainder  of  his  sentence  executed  upon  him,  by 
cutting  off  the  other  ear,  slitting  the  other  side  of  his  nose,  and 
branding  the  other  cheek."  He  was  then  carried  back  to  prison, 
where  he  continued  in  close  confinement  TEN  YEARS,  and  until 
he  was  released  by  the  Long  Parliament. 

Prynne,  a  barrister,  had  written  a  book,  in  which,  among  other 
things,  he  had  spoken  severely  of  "  Keeping  Christmas,  and 
dressing  houses  with  ivy."  "  It  must  be  confessed,"  says 
Hume,  "  that  he  had  in  plainer  terms  blamed  the  Hierarchy,  the 
ceremonies,  the  innovations  in  religious  worship,  introduced  by 
Laud ;  and  this  probably  *  *  *  was  the  reason  why  his 
sentence  was  so  severe."  He  was  sentenced  to  have  his  book 
burnt  by  the  hangman ;  to  be  made  for  ever  incapable  of  his 
profession  ;  to  stand  in  the  pillory ;  to  lose  both  his  ears  ;  to  pay 
a  fine  of  £5000,  and  to  suffer  perpetual  imprisonment.*  In  pri- 
son, Prynne  still  managed  to  write  against  the  Hierarchy ;  and 

*  Neale. 


I 

REIGN  OF  KING   CHARLES  I.  201 

after  a  lapse  of  four  years  was  again  brought  from  prison  to  an- 
swer for  the  renewed  offence.  "  I  thought,"  said  Lord  Finch, 
"  that  Pry nne  had  lost  his  ears  already  ;"  but  added  he,  looking 
at  the  prisoner,  "  there  is  something  left  yet."  An  officer  of  the 
court  removing  the  hair  displayed  the  mutilated  organs.  "  I 
pray  to  God,"  replied  Prynne,  "  thai  you  may  have  ears  to  hear 
me."  "  Christians,"  said  Prynne,  as  he  presented  the  stumps  of 
his  ears  to  be  grubbed  out  by  the  hangman's  knife ;  "  stand  fast ; 
be  faithful  to  God  and  your  country,  or  you  bring  on  yourselves 
and  your  children  perpetual  slavery."* 

The  mutilation  being  effected,  Prynne  and  his  fellows  in  suf- 
fering, were  sent  to  distant  prisons,  and  afterwards  removed  to 
the  islands  of  Scilly,  Guernsey,  and  Jersey,  where  they  were 
kept  without  the  use  of  pen,  ink,  or  paper,  or  the  access  of 
friends ;  till  at  last  they  were  released  by  the  Long  Parliament. 

Nor  did  the  tender  mercies  of  Laud  stop  here.  He  pursued 
those  who  had  showed  these  men  civilities  as  they  were  carried 
to  prison.  Some  who  visited  them  in  prison,  though  it  had  not 
been  forbidden,  were  fined  d£250,  £300,  and  £500.  The  servant 
of  Prynne  was  prosecuted  in  the  High  Commission  because  he 
would  not  accuse  his  master. 

But  the  cruelties  of  Laud  cannot  be  told.  He  made  new 
rules ;  imposed  new  ceremonies ;  adorned  the  churches  with 
pictures,  images,  and  altar-pieces ;  drew  the  rituals  of  worship  to 
a  closer  assimilation  to  those  of  Rome.  "  Laud  and  other  pre- 
lates," says  Hume,  "  had  adopted  many  of  those  religious  senti- 
ments, which  prevailed  during  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries, 
when  the  Christian  Church,  as  is  well  known,  was  already  sunk 
into  those  superstitions  which  were  afterwards  continued  and 
augmented  by  the  policy  of  Rome.  Nor  was  the  resemblance 
to  the  Romish  ritual  any  objection,  but  rather  a  merit  with  Laud 
and  his  brethren ;  who  bore  a  much  greater  kindness  to  the 
1  mother  Church,'  as  they  called  her,  than  to  sectaries  and  Pres- 
byterians ;  and  frequently  recommended  her  as  a  true  Christian 
Church  ;  an  appellation  which  they  refused,  or  at  least  scrupled, 
to  give  to  others.  So  openly  were  these  tenets  espoused,"  con- 
tinues Hume,  "  that  not  only  the  discontented  Puritans  believed 
the  Church  of  England  to  be  relapsing  fast  into  superstition  ;  the 
court  of  Rome  itself  entertained  hopes  of  regaining  its  authority 
in  the  island ;  and  in  order  to  forward  Laud's  supposed  good 
intentions,  an  offer  was  twice  made  him  in  private  of  a  Cardinal's 
hat ;  which  he  declined  accepting.  His  answer  was,  as  he  him- 
self says,  "  That  there  was  something  dwelling  within  him, 
which  would  not  suffer  his  compliance  till  Rome  were  other 
than  it  was." 

*  Bancroft,  Vol.  i.,  p.  410. 


202  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

In  the  meantime,  the  spiritual  courts  were  full  of  business. 
"  Every  week,"  says  Neale,  "  one  or  another  of  the  Puritan  min- 
isters was  suspended  or  deprived ;  and  their  families  driven  to 
distress:  nor  was  there  any  prospect  of  relief;  the  clouds  gath- 
ering thicker  every  day,  and  threatening  a  violent  storm." 

These  "  Puritan  ministers"  were  the  early  ministers  of  Mas- 
sachusetts Bay;  and  the  ministers  of  the  people  who  came 
through  the  forests  to  settle  the  towns  on  the  Connecticut,  and 
on  the  shore  of  Long  Island  Sound.  The  colony  at  Plymouth 
had  lived,  and  others  began  to  think  of  freedom  to  worship  God 
in  New  England.  "  The  sun  shines  as  brightly  in  America," 
said  they,  "  let  us  go."  We  shall  leave  our  native  land ;  we 
shall  encounter  perils  and  distress  :  but  we  and  our  children  shall 
have  FREEDOM  TO  WORSHIP  GOD. 


XV. 


TIMES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD* 

King  and  Prelates  combine  against  the  liberties  of  the  People.  Popish 
ceremonies  and  utensils.  Images,  pictures  of  God  the  Father.  Com- 
munion tables  turned  into  altars.  Natural  tendency  of  prelatic  princi- 
ples to  corruption  and  persecution.  Their  fruit  on  a  broad  scale,  and 
for  a  thousand  years.  Original  idea  of  "  A  Church  without  a  Bishop, 
a  State  without  a  king." 

AT  the  coronation  of  Charles,  a  novelty  had  been  introduced  by 
the  officiating  prelates,  which  struck  the  minds  of  his  Protestant 
subjects  with  alarm.  The  king  sitting  with  his  crown  and  royal 
robes,  the  officiating  bishop  in  the  name  of  his  brethren,  recited 
to  him  the  words  of  this  charge :  "  Stand  and  hold  fast  from 
henceforth  the  place  to  which  you  have  been  heir  by  the  succes- 
sion of  your  forefathers,  being  now  delivered  to  you  by  the 
authority  of  Almighty  God,  and  by  the  hands  of  us,  and  all  the 
bishops  the  servants  of  God.  And  as  you  see  the  clergy  to  come 
nearer  to  the  altar  than  other  s^  so  remember  that  in  all  places 
convenient^  you  give  them  greater  honor ;  that  the  mediator  of 
God  and  man  may  exalt  you  on  the  kingly  throne  to  be  a  medi- 
ator betwixt  the  clergy  and  laity  ;  that  you  may  reign  for  ever 
with  Jesus  Christ  the  king  of  kings  and  lord  of  lords." 

King  Charles  never  forgot  this  lesson.  His  constant  aim  was 
to  uphold  and  aggrandize  the  clergy.  His  queen,  Henrietta,  a 
woman  of  exquisite  beauty  and  blandishments,  and  possessed 
of  an  unbounded  influence  over  the  mind  of  her  husband,  was 
a  papist.  It  pleased  her  to  see  papists  raised  to  authority  and 
favor.  It  pleased  her  to  see  the  Church  of  England  adopting 
the  rituals  and  doctrines  of  Rome;  it  pleased  the  king,  it 
pleased  Bishop  Laud.  Why  should  any  favor  be  shown  to  the 

*  I  employ  in  this  caption  the  most  honorable  designation  of  the  man — the  one 
by  which  he  is  now  ordinarily  known;  intending,  however,  to  embrace  the  whole 
time  of  his  ascendency.  He  became  archbishop  in  1633.  He  was  made  Bishop  of 
St.  David's  in  1621 ;  afterwards  he  was  translated  to  the  See  of  London.  His  actual 
supremacy  in  church  affairs  began  in  October,  1627,  upon  the  sequestration  of 
Archbishop  Abbot. 


204  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Puritans,  who  set  themselves  so  stoutly  against  popish  doctrines 
and  ceremonies,  as  well  as  against  the  absolute  prerogatives  of  the 
king  ?  Why  should  the  king  trouble  himself  with  parliaments, 
that  dared  to  question  and  resist  the  prerogatives  which  he  held 
not  from  the  British  Constitution,  but  indefeasibly,  and  unlimited, 
from  God  ?  "  In  return  for  Charles'  indulgence  towards  the 
Church,"  says  Hume,  "  Laud  and  his  followers  took  care  to 
magnify  on  every  occasion  the  regal  authority,  and  to  treat  with 
the  utmost  disdain  all  puritanical  pretensions  to  a  free  and  inde- 
pendent constitution."  But  while  these  prelates  were  so  liberal 
in  raising  the  crown  at  the  expense  of  public  liberty,  they  made 
no  scruple  of  encroaching  themselves  on  royal  rights  the  most 
incontestible,  in  order  to  exalt  the  hierarchy,  and  to  procure  to 
their  own  order,  dominion,  and  independence.  All  the  doctrines 
which  the  Romish  Church  had  borrowed  from  some  of  the 
Fathers,  and  which  freed  the  spiritual  from  subordination  to 
the  civil  power,  were  now  adopted  by  the  Church  of  England, 
and  interwoven  with  her  political  and  religious  tenets.  A  divine 
and  apostolical  character  was  insisted  on  preferably  to  a  legal 
and  parliamentary  one.  The  sacerdotal  character  was  magnified 
as  sacred  and  indefeasible.  All  right  to  spiritual  authority,  or 
even  to  private  judgment,  was  refused  to  "  profane  laymen." 

In  one  word,  it  was  a  conspiracy  between  the  prelates  and  the 
king,  against  the  civil  and  religious  liberties  of  the  people.  No- 
thing but  the  civil  war  that  followed,  prevented  the  nation  from 
being  carried  back  into  the  chains  of  popery,  and  into  an  un- 
limited and  hopeless  despotism. 

A  few  specimens  will  serve  to  show  the  character  of  the  su- 
perstitions introduced  by  Laud.  "  St.  Katharine's  church  having 
been  repaired,  was  suspended  from  all  divine  service  till  it  should 
be  consecrated  again.  On  Sunday,  16th  January,  1630,  Bishop 
Laud  came,  with  a  procession,  to  consecrate  it.  At  his  ap- 
proach to  the  west  door  of  the  church,  which  was  shut  and 
guarded  by  halberdiers,  some  who  were  appointed  for  the  pur- 
pose, cried  with  a  loud  voice,  c  Open,  open,  ye  everlasting  doors, 
that  the  king  of  glory  may  come  in.'  "  As  soon  as  Laud  en- 
tered the  doors,  he  fell  down  upon  his  knees,-and  with  eyes  lifted 
up,  and  his  arms  spread  abroad,  he  said,  "  This  place  is  holy ; 
the  ground  is  holy ;  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost,  I  pronounce  it  holy."  Then  walking  toward  the  chancel 
he  took  up  some  of  the  dust  and  threw  it  into  the  air  several 
times.  When  he  approached  near  the  rail  of  the  communion  table, 
he  bowed  toward  it  five  or  six  times ;  and  returning,  went  round 
the  church  with  his  attendants,  saying  the  100th,  and  then  the 
19th  Psalm,  as  prescribed  in  the  Roman  Pontificale.  He  then 
read  several  collects,  in  one  of  which  he  prayed  "  That  all  who 


TIMES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD.  205 

should  thereafter  be  buried  within  the  circuit  of  that  holy  and 
sacred  place,  may  rest  in  their  sepulchre  in  peace,  till  Christ's 
corning  at  judgment,  and  may  then  rise  to  eternal  life  and  hap- 
piness." Then  sitting  under  a  cloth  of  state  in  the  aisle  of  the 
chancel  near  the  communion-table,  he  took  a  written  book  in  his 
hand,  and  pronounced  curses  upon  those  who  should  thereafter 
profane  that  holy  place."  At  the  conclusion  of  each  curse  he 
bowed  to  the  east,  and  said,  "  Let  all  the  people  say  amen." 
When  these  curses,  about  twenty  in  number,  were  ended,  he 
pronounced  in  like  manner,  blessings  upon  all  who  had  any  hand 
in  framing  and  building  that  sacred  and  beautiful  edifice,  and  on 
those  who  had  given,  or  should  hereafter  give  any  chalices, 
plate,  ornaments,  or  other  utensils ;  and  at  the  end  of  every  bless- 
ing, he  bowed  to  the  east,  and  said,  "  Let  all  the  people  say 
amen."  Then  followed  the  sermon  and  the  sacrament.  The 
consecration  of  the  elements  he  performed  in  the  following 
manner ;  "  As  he  approached  the  altar,  he  made  five  or  six  low- 
bows  ;  and  coming  to  the  side  of  it  where  the  bread  and  wine 
were  covered,  he  bowed  seven  times ;  then  *  *  he  carne  near 
the  bread,  and  gently  lifting  up  the  corner  of  the  napkin  beheld 
it;  and  immediately  letting  fall  the  napkin  retreated  hastily  a 
step  or  two,  and  made  three  low  obeisances.  His  lordship  then 
advanced,  and  having  uncovered  the  bread,  bowed  three  times 
as  before  ;  then  laid  his  hand  on  the  cup,  and  letting  it  go,  he 
stepped  back  and  bowed  three  times  toward  it ;  then  came  near 
again,  and  lifting  up  the  cover  of  the  cup,  looked  into  it,  and 
seeing  the  wine  he  let  go  the  cover  again,  retired  back,  and 
bowed  as  before,  after  which  the  elements  were  consecrated."* 

He  consecrated  St.  Giles'  Church  in  the  same  manner.  It  had 
been  repaired,  and  in  part  rebuilt;  and  divine  service  had  been 
performed,  and  the  sacraments  administered  in  it  for  some  years. 
But  upon  Laud's  accession,  he  interdicted  the  Church  from  divine 
service  till  it  had  been  re-consecrated.  Several  other  churches 
and  chapels  were  in  like  manner  shut  up,  till  they  had  been  con- 
secrated after  the  same  fashion. 

Laud  now  set  himself  to  introduce  into  the  churches  the  orna- 
ments and  trappings  of  Popery.  To  support  the  enormous  ex- 
pense of  repairing  and  beautifying  St.  Paul's,  he  raised  money 
by  "  compositions  with  recusants,  commutations  of  penance,  ex- 
orbitant fines  in  the  Star-Chamber  and  High  Commission;  in- 
somuch that  it  became  a  proverb  that  St.  Paul's  was  repaired 
with  the  sins  of  the  people ;"  nor  was  the  work  much  more  than 
begun,  when,  after  the  expenditure  of  more  than  half  a  million  of 
our  money,  the  civil  wrars  arrested  its  progress. 

The  zeal  of  the  people  in  the  Keformation  had  destroyed  many 

*  Neale. 


206  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

of  the  Popish  ornaments  in  the  churches.  Yet  many  remained  ; 
and  Laud  would  have  the  others  restored.  In  the  Cathedral  of 
Canterbury,  there  yet  remained  the  images  of  the  Twelve  Apos- 
tles, and  of  Christ,  together  with  the  images  of  sundry  Popish 
saints.  On  the  windows  were  placed  images  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
inscribed,  "Hail,  Mary,  Spouse  of  God."  Besides  these,  there 
were  pictures  of  God  the  Father,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  In  the 
Cathedral  of  Durham  were  carved  images  ;  and  among  them  an 
image  of  God  the  Father.  The  dignitaries  of  the  Cathedral  had 
procured  copes  of  Mass  priests  with  crucifixes  and  images  of  the 
Trinity  upon  them.  They  had  consecrated  knives  to  cut  the 
sacred  bread ;  and  lighted  candles  upon  the  altars  on  Sundays 
and  saints'  days.  On  Candlemas  day  they  had  no  less  than  200 
of  these,  of  which  60  were  upon  and  about  the  altar." 

The  repairing  of  these  paintings  and  images,  was  considered 
by  many  as  the  signal  of  an  open  return  to  essential  Popery. 
Many  among  the  most  moderate,  thought  that  these  decorations 
tended  to  image  worship,  and  that  they  were  directly  contrary  to 
the  homily  on  the  peril  of  idolatry.  Some  ministers  preached 
against  them  ;  others  ventured  to  remove  them  ;  and  in  return  fell 
under  the  vengeance  of  Laud  and  the  High  Commission.  Ruin- 
ous fines,  a  prison,  or  recantation,  awaited  all  who  ventured  to 
open  their  lips  against  these  things.  Some  were  arraigned  and 
punished  for  the  very  texts  on  which  they  preached  ;  and  no  doubt 
it  was  very  easy  to  find  passages  in  the  Bible  containing  no  very 
obscure  inuendos  against  such  doings.  One  preached  on  Num- 
bers, xiv.4  :  "Let  us  make  a  captain,  and  let  us  return  into  Egypt" 
Another,  on  1  Kings,  xiii.  2 :  " And  he  cried  against  the  altar  in 
the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  said,  0  ALTAR,  ALTAR."  Such  persons 
reaped  the  reward  of  their  temerity  in  Newgate.  Says  Hume : 
"  Not  only  such  of  the  clergy  as  neglected  to  observe  every  cere- 
mony, were  suspended  or  deprived  by  the  High  Commission  ; 
oaths  were  by  many  of  the  bishops  imposed  upon  the  church- 
wardens ;  and  they  were  sworn  to  inform  against  any  who  acted 
contrary  to  the  ecclesiastical  canons."  Some  were  whipped ; 
some  confined  in  a  dark  dungeon  a  whole  winter,  chained  to  a 
post  in  the  middle  of  the  room,  with  irons  on  their  hands  and 
feet ;  having  no  food  but  bread  and  water,  with  a  pad  of  straw  to 
lie  on  ;  and  they  were  not  released,  but  on  condition  of  taking  an 
oath  and  giving  a  bond  not  to  preach  any  more,  and  to  depart 
from  the  kingdom  within  a  month,  never  to  return. 

Henry  Sherfield  was  tried,  May  20, 1632,  in  the  Star-Chamber, 
for  taking  down  some  painted  glass  out  of  one  of  the  windows  of 
St.  Edmund's  Church,  in  Salisbury ;  in  which  were  seven  pic- 
tures of  God  the  Father,  in  form  of  an  old  man  in  a  blue  and  red 
coat,  ivith  a  pouch  by  his  side :  one  represented  him  as  creating 


TIMES  OP  ARCHBISHOP   LAUD.  207 

the  sun  and  moon  with  a  pair  of  compasses ;  others  as  working 
on  the  business  of  the  six  days'  creation,  "  and  at  last  he  sits  in 
an  elbow  chair  at  rest."  Many  simple  people,  upon  going  in  or 
out  of  the  Church,  did  reverence  to  this  window,  because,  as  they 
said,  the  Lord  their  God  was  there.  This  gave  such  offence  to 
Sherfield,  who  was  a  justice  of  the  peace,  that  he  moved  the 
parish,  at  a  vestry,  for  leave,  to  take  it  down,  and  to  set  up  a 
window  of  glass  in  its  place ;  which  leave  was  granted. 
Soon  after,  Mr.  Sherfield  broke  with  his  staff  the  pictures  of  God 
the  Father,  in  order  to  new  glaze  the  window.  He  was  called 
before  the  High  Commission.  Sherfield  pleaded  that  that  church 
was  a  lay  fee,  exempt  from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  bishop  ;  that 
the  parish  had  lawful  power  to  take  down  the  glass :  and  that,  as 
for  the  images,  it  was  impious,  by  the  divine  law,  to  make  an 
image  or  resemblance  of  God  the  Father.  Laud  stood  against 
him,  and  justified  the  images.  Sherfield  was  fined  ^£500,  and 
committed  to  close  imprisonment. 

A  Mr.  Workman  had  ventured  to  say  in  a  sermon,  that  these 
pictures  and  images  were  no  ornaments  to  churches,  but  tended 
to  idolatry,  according  to  the  Homily.  For  this  he  was  suspend- 
ed, excommunicated,  condemned  to  pay  the  costs  of  suit  in  the 
High  Commission,  and  imprisoned.  He  had  long  been  noted 
as  a  man  of  distinguished  piety,  wisdom  and  moderation.  In 
consideration  of  his  merits,  and  of  the  necessities  of  his  family, 
the  city  of  Gloucester  gave  him  an  annuity  of  £20.  For  this 
act  of  charity,  the  Mayor,  Town  Clerk,  and  Alderman,  were  cited 
before  the  High  Commission,  fined,  and  the  annuity  cancelled. 
Mr.  Workman  set  up  a  little  school :  Laud  inhibited  him  from 
this  at  his  peril.  Workman  then  tried  the  practice  of  physic; 
but  this  Laud  absolutely  forbade  ;  so  that  being  deprived  of  all 
methods  of  subsistence,  the  persecuted  man  sank  into  despon- 
dency and  died. 

In  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  when  the  bread  was  no  longer 
thought  the  real  body  of  Christ,  nor  the  communion  a  sacrifice, 
the  altar  was  deemed  both  a  falsehood  and  an  absurdity.  It 
was  accordingly  turned  into  a  communion  table  ;  and  removed 
from  the  wall,  so  that  the  minister  might  no  longer  seem  to  be  a 
sacrificing"  priest,  a  mediator  between  God  and  man,  ministering 
as  such  with  his  back  to  the  people.  Laud  now  took  order  for 
turning  the  communion-tables  into  altars,  and  removing  them 
back  to  the  wall,  as  they  had  stood  in  the  times  of  Popery.  "  It 
is  not  easy,"  says  Hume,  "  to  imagine  the  discontents  excited  by 
this  innovation,  and  the  suspicions  which  it  gave  rise  to."  "  Many 
ministers  and  churchwardens,"  says  Neale,  "were  excommu- 
nicated, fined,  and  obliged  to  do  penance,  for  neglecting  the 
bishop's  injunctions.  Great  numbers  refused  to  come  up  to  the 


208  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

rails  and  receive  the  sacrament ;  for  which  some  were  fined,  and 
others  excommunicated,  to  the  number  of  hundreds." 

The  court  clergy  were  become  very  exact  in  observing  the 
popish  ceremony  of  bowing  to  the  altar  at  various  parts  of  ser- 
vice, and  upon  coming  in  and  going  out  of  church.  "  Laud 
strictly  enjoined  it ;  and  always  had  a  lane  made  upon  his  com- 
ing in  and  going  out,  that  he  might  see  the  altar  and  do  reverence 
towards  it."  "  In  the  new  body  of  statutes  for  the  Cathedral  of 
Canterbury,  the  dean  and  prebendaries  were  obliged  by  oath  to 
bow  to  the  altar  at  coming  in  and  going  out  of  church." 

Laud,  also,  undertook  to  enforce  by  penalties,  the  ceremony 
of  bowing  whenever  the  name  of  Jesus  occurs  in  the  service ; 
and  many  ministers  were  fined,  censured,  or  deprived  for  omit- 
ting this  ceremony  or  for  speaking  against  it. 

The  people  made  too  much  of  the  Sabbath  to  suit  the  genius 
of  Laud.  The  Lord  Chief  Justice  having  observed  the  mischief 
arising  from  church-ales,  clerk-ales,  and  other  revelries  on  the 
Lord's  day,  followed  the  example  of  the  judges  in  the  10th  of 
Elizabeth,  and  made  an  order  at  the  assizes  to  suppress  them. 
Laud  interfered,  and  the  Chief  Justice  was  forced  to  recant. 
The  justices  signed  an  humble  petition  to  the  king,  declaring  that 
these  revels  not  only  introduced  great  profanation  of  the  Lord's 
day,  but  riotous  tippling ;  and  other  things  contrary  to  order  and 
good  government.  At  the  instance  of  Laud,  the  king  published 
his  Book  of  Sports,  declaring  it  his  pleasure,  that  his  subjects, 
having  first  done  their  duty  to  God,  should  engage  in  all  manner 
of  lawful  games,  recreations,  and  sports ;  and  commanded  that 
this  declaration  should  be  published  through  all  the  parish 
churches  from  the  pulpit.  The  court  had  their  balls,  masquer- 
ades, and  other  plays  on  the  Sabbath;  and  the  youth  throughout 
the  country  engaged  in  all  kinds  of  games  and  revelling  on  that 
holy  day.  A  minister  of  the  Gospel  ventured  to  write,  "  A  de- 
fence of  the  most  ancient  and  sacred  ordinance  of  God,  the 
Sabbath  day;"  for  which  he  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  High 
Commission.  The  Bishop  of  Ely,  Dr.  Pocklington,  and  Heylin, 
the  archbishop's  chaplain,  were  employed  to  write  down  the  Sab- 
bath, and  to  write  up  the  sports. 

The  sober  and  religious  part  of  the  community  were  struck 
with  horror.  Many  of  the  clergy  refused  to  publish  the  book  of 
sports.  Others  read  it,  but  immediately  after  "  read  the  Fourth 
Commandment;  adding,  This  is  the  Law  of  God;  the  other  is 
the  injunction  of  man."  Laud  knew  that  pressing  the  Book  of 
Sports  would  distress  the  Puritans,  and  accordingly  it  was  pressed 
with  relentless  severity.  Many  clergymen  were  silenced  and 
deprived ;  others  were  excommunicated ;  others  were  forced  to 
leave  the  kingdom  for  not  publishing  the  Book  of  Sports. 


TIMES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD.  209 

A  Dr.  Bastwick  ventured  to  call  in  question  the  divine  right  of 
the  order  of  bishops  ;  he  was  cited  before  the  High  Commission, 
fined  a  thousand  pounds,  and  thrown  into  prison  till  he  should 
recant. 

Laud  stretched  out  his  hand  across  the  sea,  but  his  endeavors  to 
compel  the  English  congregations  at  Hamburgh,,  and  elsewhere, 
to  conform  to  the  canons  and  rubrics,  only  showed  the  impo- 
tency  of  his  malice  and  bigotry  to  accomplish  anything  there. 
The  chaplains  of  the  English  regiments  and  factories  abroad 
were,  however,  brought  under  the  yoke ;  the  merchants  abroad 
were  compelled  to  yield  ;  the  king's  ambassador  in  France  was 
forbidden  to  frequent  the  Protestant  worship  ;  and  he  took  care 
to  publish,  that  the  Church  of  England  looked  not  upon  the  Hu- 
guenots as  a  part  of  their  communion.  The  descendants  of  the 
foreigners  who  had  fled  to  England  from  persecution,  and  who 
had  been  allowed  to  worship  God  in  their  own  way,  were  now 
forced  to  abandon  the  way  of  their  fathers,  and  to  conform  to 
the  ceremonials  of  the  English  Church.  Thousands  of  them 
left  the  kingdom, — many  of  them,  such  as  had  been  engaged  in 
manufacture,  greatly  to  the  benefit  of  the  poor  and  to  the  advan- 
tage of  the  nation.  The  French  government  pleaded  the  exam- 
ple of  England  to  justify  their  severities  against  the  Huguenots. 
"  If,"  said  Richelieu,  "  a  king  of  England,  who  is  a  Protestant, 
will  not  permit  two  Disciplines  in  his  kingdom,  why  should  a 
king  of  France,  who  is  a  Papist,  admit  two  religions  ?" 

Laud  took  another  occasion  to  exhibit  his  hatred  of  Protest- 
antism. The  Queen  of  Bohemia,  sister  of  King  Charles,  had 
earnestly  proposed  the  king  to  allow  a  public  collection,  over 
England,  for  the  poor  persecuted  ministers  of  the  Palatinate. 
The  king's  brief,  giving  this  allowance,  spoke  of  these  as  "  min- 
isters:"  and  of  their  constancy  in  the  "true  religion"  Laud 
was  enraged  that  their  religion  should  be  called  the  true ;  and 
that  the  brief  spoke  of  Rome  in  its  persecutions,  as  Anti-chris- 
tian.  He  was  enraged  that  these  men  should  be  recognized  as 
ministers ;  not  having  had  Episcopal  ordination.  His  objection 
to  calling  the  Church  of  Rome  Anti-christian  is  one  which  those 
who  at  thp  present  day  are  earnest  to  seek  out  a  less  filthy  chan- 
nel for  the  "  Succession,"  would  do  well  to  mark.  He  objected 
to  calling'  Rome  Anti-christian,  "  because  it  would  then  follow 
that  she  ivas  IN  NO  CAPACITY  TO  CONVEY  SACERDOTAL  POWER 
IN  ORDINATIONS  ;  and  consequently  the  benefits  of  the  priesthood, 
and  the  force  of  holy  ministrations  >  would  be  LOST  IN  THE  ENG- 
LISH CHURCH  ;  forasmuch  as  she  has  NO  ORDERS  BUT  WHAT  SHE 

DERIVES    FROM    THE    CHURCH    OF    RoME."* 

The  collection  was  defeated.     Some  Puritan  divines  encourag- 

*  Neale. 
14 


210  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ing  their  friends  to  enlarge  their  charity,  were  brought  before  the 
High  Commission,  and  a  stop  put  to  the  collection. 

Conformity  to  the  new  ceremonies  pressed  with  greater  vigor, 
spies  were  everywhere  employed.  Informers  were  upon  the 
watch,  whenever  a  minister  suspected  of  Puritanism  entered  the 
pulpit.  "  No  man  was  safe  in  public  company,  nor  even  in 
conversing  with  his  friends." 

It  is  a  weariness  to  proceed  any  further  in  these  details  of  the 
superstitions  introduced ;  the  treacheries  and  cruelties  practised 
by  the  prelates  of  the  Church  of  England  in  those  days. 

The  Puritan  ministers,  harassed,  persecuted,  hunted  from  one 
diocese  to  another,  turned  their  thoughts  to  the  wilds  of  America. 
From  the  midst  of  such  persecutions  came  out  those  who 
planted  the  early  Churches  of  Massachusetts  ;  and  some  of  them 
removing  southward,  began  the  early  plantations  on  the  Connec- 
ticut, as  at  Windsor,  Hartford,  Weathersfield,  and  those  upon 
the  seashore,  as  at  New  Haven,  Branford,  Guilford,  Milford, 
Fairfield,  Stamford,  and  Norwalk.  From  the  midst  of  these 
corruptions  and  persecutions,  came  the  early  fathers  of  this  con- 
gregation, whose  graves  are  still  visible  in  our  ancient  burying- 
grounds  ;  and  whose  names'  are  still  perpetuated  among  their 
descendants  of  the  sixth  and  seventh  generations.  Till  this  time 
they  had  remained  in  the  Church  of  England :  they  had  not 
separated  from  it  like  the  Pilgrims  of  Plymouth  ;  but  they  had 
groaned  under  its  corruptions  and  tyranny  ;  till  compelled  at  last 
to  flee,  and  looking  narrowly  into  the  Word  of  God  that  they 
might  lay  the  foundations  right,  they  returned  to  the  apostolic 
simplicity  of  organization  and  worship ;  rejecting  the  hierarchy 
and  the  trammels  and  forms  imposed  by  mere  human  authority, 
as  the  source  of  that  corruption,  despotism,  and  persecution, 
under  which  the  disciples  of  Christ  had  so  long  groaned  in 
bondage.  The  fathers  of  these  New  England  Churches  were 
enlightened,  conscientious,  bold,  and  determined  men ;  who 
valued  religious  liberty  above  all  earthly  price.  Their  ministers 
were  all  regularly  ordained  ministers  in  the  Church  of  England  ; 
among  the  most  learned,  the  most  laborious,  the  most  beloved, 
and  godly  in  the  land.  Puritanism  had  endured  persecution 
for  ages.  Again  and  again  had  the  authorities  supposed  it 
rooted  from  the  land.  Now,  once  more,  the  best  ministers  and 
people  of  the  Church  of  England  had  found  its  corruptions  and 
cruelties  too  grievous  to  be  borne  ;  and  fondly  as  they  had  been 
attached  to  that  Church,  no  sooner  were  they  free,  and  left  with 
the  Bible  and  the  light  of  experience,  to  guide  their  judgment, 
than  they  cast  off  the  prelacy,  its  impositions,  and  its  forms  to- 
gether. In  twelve  years,  during  the  ascendency  of  Laud,  there 


TIMES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD.  211 

came  over  to  New  England  more  than  4000  such  people. 
Their  posterity  bearing  their  names,  are  scattered  through  the 
wide  extent  of  the  United  States.  It  was  nearly  ten  years  after 
the  landing  of  the  Pilgrims  at  Plymouth,  before  another  colony 
was  established  in  New  England  ;  but  ere  another  ten  years  had 
passed,  SEVENTY-SEVEN  MINISTERS,  who  had  been  clergymen  of 
the  Church  of  England,  were  established  as  pastors  and  teachers 
of  the  Puritan  churches  in  the  rising  villages  of  New  England.* 

The  tide  of  emigration  continued  to  pour  on.  "  The  Puritans," 
says  Hume,  "  shipped  themselves  off  to  America,  and  laid  there 
the  foundations  of  a  government  which  possessed  all  the  liberty, 
both  civil  and  religious,  of  which  they  found  themselves  bereaved 
in  their  native  country.f  But  their  enemies,  unwilling  that 
they  should  anywhere  enjoy  ease  and  contentment,  and  dreading, 
perhaps,  the  consequences  of  so  disaffected  a  colony,  prevailed 
on  the  king  to  issue  a  proclamation,  debarring  these  devotees  ac- 
cess even  into  these  inhospitable  deserts." 

After  multitudes  of  the  Puritans  had  been  drained  off,  those 
who  had  remained  members  of  the  Established  Church,  unable  to 
bear  its  tyranny  any  longer,  rose  upon  the  king  and  the  bishops, 
and  swept  away  the  throne  and  the  hierarchy  together.  Our 
fathers  were  away.  They  were  here  in  the  wilderness  at  the  time 
of  the  civil  wars  in  England.  Hooker,  Davenport,  and  Cotton, 
were  sent  for  by  the  Long  Parliament,  to  constitute  a  part  of  the 
celebrated  Assembly  of  Divines;  but  they  wisely  declined. 

In  that  Assembly  of  Divines,  the  most  learned  and  the  ablest 
men  in  England—though  bred  in  all  the  prejudices  of  the  Es- 

*  Cotton  Mather  gives  the  catalogue  of  these  seventy-seven  ministers,  as  well 
as  the  catalogue  of  the  churches  where  they  were  settled.  Many  of  them  had  been 
second  to  none  in  Old  England.  Perhaps  the  history  of  the  whole  world  may  be 
searched  in  vain  to  find  seventy-seven  other  names  of  cotemporary  ministers,  of 
contiguous  churches,  equal  to  these  in  learning,  in  piety,  in  cool,  sound  judgment, 
in  firmness,  enterprise,  and  in  everything  that  can  adorn  the  character  of  a  man  and 
minister  of  Christ.  There  was  Thomas  Hooker,  of  Hartford,  of  whom  Jinus,  the 
great  theologian  of  his  age,  used  to  say,  "  He  never  knew  his  equal."  There  was 
John  Cotton,  of  Boston.  There  was  Davenport  of  New-Haven,  who  was  3tyled  by 
one  of  the  ablest  of  his  cotemporaries,  "  A  princely  preacher."  There  were  Wilson, 
and  Norton,  and  Elliot,  the  Apostle  of  the  Indians,  and  Shepard,  of  Cambridge ;  in- 
deed nearly  the  whole  list  is  made  up  of  distinguished  names.  England  was  sifted, 
and  the  choicest  of  her  ministers  transplanted  to  the  New  World. 

In  addition  to  these  seventy-seven  names,  Cotton  Mather  gives  the  names  of  four- 
teen more,  who  were  students  in  divinity,  but  who  finished  their  education  in  the 
colonies.  Among  these  were  Mr.  Bishop  of  Stamford,  and  Thomas  Hanford,  the 
first  pastor  of  the  Church  in  Norwalk  ;  who  began  to  preach  to  the  fathers  of  this 
congregation  in  1648,  and  continued  their  minister  till  his  death,  in  1692  ;  a  period 
of  44  years. 

t  "  It  has  been  computed,"  says  Neale,  "  that  the  four  settlements  of  New  Eng- 
land, viz.  Plymouth,  Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  and  New  Haven,  all  of  which 
were  accomplished  before  the  civil  wars,  drained  England  of  £400,000  or  £500,000 
sterling  (a  very  great  sum  in  those  days)  ;  and  if  the  persecutions  of  the  Puritans 
had  continued  twelve  years  longer,  it  is  thought  that  a  fourth  part  of  the  riches  of 
the  kingdom  would  have  passed  out  of  it  through  this  channel." 


212  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

tablished  Church — when  they  met  to  establish  a  Church  Polity 
in  consonance  with  the  Word  of  God,  renounced  the  scheme  of 
Prelacy  altogether.  That  scheme  came  in  again  at  the  Restora- 
tion, as  the  Bourbons  returned  to  France,  not  by  the  wishes  of 
the  people,  but  by  the  hand  of  power.  No  sooner  was  it  re-in- 
stated than  it  began  its  persecutions  of  the  Puritans  within  the 
bosom  of  the  Church.  The  Puritans  and  Puritan  divines  again 
began  to  pour  into  America,  and  as  fast  as  they  arrived,  from 
sober  conviction  they  renounced  the  hierarchy  and  adopted  the 
simple  organization  and  order  of  the  New  England  Churches. 
"  These  ministers,"  says  Cotton  Mather,  "  which  were  without 
any  exception,  as  faithful,  painful,  and  useful  as  most  in  the  na- 
tion, being  exiled,  there  were  not  known  to  be  left  so  many  Non- 
Conformist  ministers  as  there  were  counties  in  England."  Yet 
the  spirit  and  principles  of  Puritanism  immediately  began  to 
spring  up  and  grow,  so  that  in  a  few  years  the  same  domineering 
spirit  of  the  hierarchy  drove  out  TWO  THOUSAND  of  the  ablest  and 
most  devoted  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England,  upon  a  Pro- 
testant St.  Bartholomew's  Day.  And  in  spite  of  all  artifices,  re- 
wards and  punishments ;  with  every  effort  of  patronage,  wealth 
and  power — test-acts  and  disabilities — in  spite  of  intolerable  and 
crushing  burdens  and  discouragements,  Puritanism  has  since 
continued  to  gain  upon  the  Established  Church  of  England,  till 
now  one -half  of  the  regular  attendants  upon  public  worship  in 
England,  are  numbered  among  the  Dissenters.  A  large  share  of 
the  remaining  half,  the  old  Laudean  system,  with  all  its  enor- 
mities of  corrupt  doctrines,  superstitious  forms,  and  intolerance, 
under  the  new  name  of  Pnseyism,  is  carrying  back  with  rapid 
strides  to  the  very  gates  of  Rome.  In  all  these  times,  multitudes  of 
Christ's  true  disciples  have  no  doubt  lived  and  died  in  the  bosom 
of  the  English  Established  Church.  Doubtless,  Christ  has  true 
and  beloved  disciples  among  all  denominations  who  bear  his 
name.  Doubtless,  many  are  found,  of  whom  the  world  is  not 
worthy,  even  amid  the  anti-christian  abominations  of  Popery.  It 
is  true,  also,  that  in  the  Articles  of  the  English  Church,  the  true 
scheme  of  the  Gospel  is  traced  in  clear  and  living  lines.  With 
many  glaring  defects,  there  are  also  many  noble  excellences  in 
her  Liturgy.  But  the  character  and  tendencies  of  the  PRELATICAL 
SYSTEM  have  been  legibly  written  in  the  results  of  its  past  domi- 
nion over  the  Christian  world;  For  that  scheme  of  polity,  th< 
Popish  and  Puseyistic  doctrines  have  ever  shown,  in  the  long  rui 
and  on  a  grand  scale,  an  invincible  affinity.  Those  tendencies 
are  at  the  present  day  broadly  developed  in  the  practical  working 
of  the  system  in  its  fairest  fields,  England  and  the  United  States. 
We  see  here  a  gangrene,  and  there  a  foul  leprosy ;  creeping  on, 
and  spreading  over  large  portions  of  the  body,  the  marks  of  a] 


TIMES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD.  213 

preaching  spiritual  death.  We  trace  the  history  backward,  and 
find  the  same  seeds  of  mischief  ever  springing  up,  and  bearing 
still  the  same  fruits  of  intolerance  and  spiritual  death.  We 
trace  these  unvaried  results  of  the  system,  on  a  large  scale, 
and  for  a  long  course  of  time,  up  to  the  causes  which  produced 
them.  They  lie  in  the  assumption  of  ghostly  prerogatives  and 
power ;  priestly  intervention  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins ;  bap- 
tismal regeneration;  the  validity  of  ordinances  ministered  by 
virtue  of  a  power  to  confer  grace  in  sacraments ;  a  virtue 
flowing  down  through  a  chain  of  an  Apostolic  succession;  the 
right  of  the  Church,  viz.  of  a  Hierarchy,  to  make  canons  and  pre- 
scribe ceremonies  and  forms  for  the  worship  of  God:  the  denial 
of  the  right  of  private  judgment ;  and  of  the  sufficiency  of 
the  Bible  alone,  without  human  traditions  or  Church  interpreta- 
tions, to  make  men  wise  unto  salvation.  These  are  the  fond  tenets 
of  Puseyism ;  the  rudiments  and  essentials  of  Popery  itself; 
without  which  all  other  abominations  of  Popery  would  fly  like 
straws  upon  a  whirlwind.  To  these  false  principles,  these  tenets 
of  superstition  and  despotism,  we  trace  the  tyranny  and  spiritual 
death,  from  which  so  many  godly  ministers  and  people  of  the 
Church  of  England,  found  no  relief,  but  in  coming  out  and  being 
separate.  After  witnessing  the  results  of  that  scheme  in  Eng- 
land, we  look  abroad  to  Austria,  to  Spain,  to  Italy ;  we  cross  to 
Asia,  where  without  a  Pope,  the  same  principles  have  reigned 
long  enough,  and  with  sufficient  power,  to  show  their  results ; 
and  we  find  everywhere  the  same  dismal  reign  of  darkness  and 
spiritual  death.  We  go  up  to  remoter  ages,  and  a  Hierarchy 
with  its  forms  and  fences,  its  decrees  and  its  canons — wherever 
it  meets  us — presents  to  us  still  the  same  hideous  features  of 
intolerance  and  spiritual  death.  We  tread  through  the  hollow 
aisles  and  vaults  of  the  Inquisition — the  places  of  the  dead ;  we 
go  where  the  ashes  of  martyrs  are  mouldering ;  where  the  fires 
once  raged  that  have  long  since  bern  quenched;  we  go  to  the 
towers  and  dungeons  where  the  Lollards  dragged  out  their  lives 
in  darkness  and  in  chains ;  we  go  where  the  dragooning?  were 
inflicted  on  the  Huguenots  of  France  ;  we  penetrate  the  valleys 
of  Piedmont,  where  the  nights  were  once  lightened  by  the  flames 
of  their  dwellings,  and  the  snows  around  were  crimson  with 
their  blood;  everywhere — everywhere,  we  trace  the  legitimate 
fruits  of  that  principle  which  denies  the  right  of  private  judgment 
to  the  people ;  gives  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  to  the 
fathers,  to  councils,  or  to  prelates,  under  the  name  of  "  The 
Church ;"  and  claims  for  that  Church,  " holy  and  apostolic" 
"  the  right  to  make  canons  for  the  use  of  ceremonies  in  the  wor- 
ship of  God,  and  to  enforce  the  same  by  law  as  upon  her  chil- 
dren." Surely  the  grand  experiment  has  been  tried  for  centuries 


214  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

enough ;  and  on  a  scale  sufficiently  grand.  What  is  become 
of  the  hundreds  of  happy  Churches  that  once  lined  the  shores  of 
Northern  Africa  ?  Gone  !  Where  are  the  lights  that  once  shone 
in  Asia  Minor,  in  Syria,  in  Mesopotamia,  at  Rome  ?  Gone 
out  in  a  night  of  a  thousand  years.  And  where,  in  all  these 
times,  do  we  find  the  true  light  of  the  Gospel  ?  Among  those 
poor  Churches  unblessed  with  a  prelacy  of  the  boasted  "  succes- 
sion ;"  among  the  Albigenses,  who,  in  the  words  of  Mosheim,* 
"  denied  that  the  ministers  of  religion  (bishops,  presbyters,  and 
deacons),  were  of  divine  appointment  [i.  e.,  that  they  hold  their 
authority  according  to  the  dogma  of  a  jure  divino  succession], 
and  maintained  that  the  Church  could  exist  without  an  order 
of  teachers."  We  look  among  the  Waldenses,  who  had 
bishops,  not  such  as  boast  of  a  lineal  apostolical  succession, 
but  bishops  of  the  people's  making,  and  who  held,  not  only 
that  the  Pope  of  Rome  is  not  superior  to  bishops,  but  that  "  there 
is  no  difference  as  to  rank  or  dignity  among  priests  ;"f  we  look 
to  those  poor  Churches,  which  the  Great  Harlot,  sitting  on  the 
seven  hills  of  Rome,  and  drunken  with  the  blood  of  the  saints  ; 
the  great  scarlet  persecutor  with  which  Protestant  Prelacy  is  now 
claiming  a  sisterhood,  and  a  unity  of  catholicity,  to  the  exclusion 
of  all  "  Dissenters,"  we  look  to  the  Churches  which  this  Scarlet 
Harlot  was  then  persecuting  to  death.  History  has  written  the 
character  of  prelacy  in  broad  lines  of  darkness,  despotism,  and 
blood ;  and  that  over  many  lands,  and  for  a  thousand  years ! 
With  what  arguments,  with  what  honied  accents  shall  the  world 
be  persuaded  to  try  the  grand  experiment  again  ?  An  apostolical 
succession !  The  authoritative  interpretations  of  the  Church  ! 
We  remember  who  it  was  that  sent  his  disciples  away  from  the 
tradition  of  the  elders  to  "  search  the  Scriptures ;"  thus  for  ever 
establishing  the  RIGHT  and  the  DUTY  OF  PRIVATE  JUDGMENT. 
We  remember  who  it  was  that  said  "  Prove  all  things;"  yes, 
even  the  interpretations  of  the  first  two  centuries  are  to  be  proved 
by  theWord  of  God.  Surely  those  interpretations  cannot  them- 
selves be  the  rule  of  that  standard  by  which  they  are  to  be  tried ! 
It  was  a  true  Apostle,  not  a  pretended  successor,  who  said, 
"  Though  we  or  an  angel  from  heaven  preach  any  other  Gospel 
unto  you  than  that  which  we  have  preached  unto  you,  let  him 
be  accursed."  "  God's  clergy,  a  state  whereunto  God's  people 
must  be  subject !  We  remember  who  it  was  that  said,  "  Call  no 
man  master."  The  same  it  was  who  said,  "  Ye  know  that  the 
princes  of  the  Gentiles  exercise  dominion  over  them ;  and  they 
that  are  great  exercise  authority  upon  them ;  but  it  shall  not  be 
so  among  you"  Long,  long,  has  the  world  seen  the  consequences 
of  breaking  away  from  this  injunction  of  the  Saviour.  And 
so  broadly  and  plainly  are  the  principles  of  this  injunction  writ- 
*  Vol.  ii.,  p.  204.  t  Jones'  Church  History,  p.  318. 


TIMES  OF  ARCHBISHOP  LAUD.  215 

ten  in  the  Bible,  that  with  great  uniformity  the  people  of  God 
come  to  the  same  conclusions,  the  moment  when,  released  from 
ecclesiastical  influence  and  power,  they  set  themselves  with  dili- 
gence to  search  out  the  principles  of  Church  polity  laid  down  in 
the  Word  of  God.  Wickliffe  and  his  followers  came  to  the 
same  results  with  the  Puritan  founders  of  New  England.  Those 
who  worshipped  God  in  secret  under  the  bloody  Mary,  came  to 
the  same  results.  Those  who  from  time  to  time  left  England 
for  the  wilds  of  America,  though  strongly  prejudiced  in  favor  of 
the  English  Church  establishment,  upon  searching  the  Scrip- 
tures, came  to  the  same  results  with  their  brethren  who  had  gone 
before.  The  distinguished  orator  at  a  recent  celebration  of  the 
landing  of  the  Pilgrims,  was  not  quite  correct  when  he  attributed 
the  rise  of  the  republican  principles  of  the  English  Puritans  to  the 
time  when  they  found  at  Geneva  "  A  Church  without  a  Bishop,  a 
State  without  a  king"*  Republicanism  in  the  Church  was  no 
new  thing  among  the  Puritans  of  England.  It  was  as  old  as 
Wickliffe.  Too  much  has  been  attributed  to  the  influence  of  the 
exiles  at  Geneva.  That  was  a  drop  in  the  bucket.  Before  these 
principles  were  known  at  Geneva,  thousands  had  embraced  them 
and  died  for  them  in  England.  They  owe  their  origin  not  to 
Geneva;  not  to  the  Puritans ;  not  to  Wicklife;  but  to  the  WORD 
OF  GOD  ;  to  the  principles  of  Church  polity  laid  down  in  the 
New  Testament;  and  to  its  delineations  of  the  organization,  and 
discipline  of  the  Primitive  Apostolical  Church.  The  present  age 
may  have  too  little  consideration  to  prize  these  principles. 
Light  and  uncertain  spirits  may  turn  apostates.  But  if  the 
world  should  once  more  sink  in  darkness  and  spiritual  bondage, 
these  principles  will  once  more  rise  in  majesty  to  vindicate  the 
rights  of  man  and  the  truth  of  God.  Their  might  is  inherent 
and  indestructible.  In  the  greater  spread  of  light  and  freedom 
and  pure  religion,  these  principles  will  ever  continue  to  rise 
and  prevail.  What  our  fathers  proved  by  Scripture  and  justi- 
fied by  reason,  has  now  been  made  a  matter  of  experiment  for 
two  hundred  years ;  and  the  spot  where  that  experiment  has 
been  tried,  though  the  trial  began  in  the  wilderness,  and  was  con- 
tinued in  the  midst  of  difficulties,  hardships,  and  wars ;  that 
spot  has  long  stood  forth  unrivalled  by  any  other  spot  for  any 
two  hundred  years  in  the  history  of  the  whole  world.  In  its 
results  to  this  nation  alone,  the  grand  experiment  has  richly 
repaid  all  the  toils  and  sufferings  it  cost.  Future  genera- 
tions will  yet  appreciate,  better  than  the  fondest  admirer  of  the 
Puritans  has  ever  yet  appreciated,  the  worth  of  their  principles 
to  the  cause  of  freedom  and  humanity ;  to  the  cause  of  right- 
eousness and  of  God. 

*  Hon.  Mr.  Choate. 


XVI. 


REMOVALS  TO  AMERICA,  AND  FOUNDING  OF 
THE  PURITAN  CHURCHES. 

Plymouth  a  few  years  after  its  settlement.  Plantation  at  Cape  Ana 
Naumkeag.  Charlestown.  Fleet  and  Colony  of  1629.  Tolerant  spirit 
of  the  Colonists.  Salem  Church.  The  Fleet  and  Colony  of  1630. 
Rapid  emigration.  Planting  of  the  New  England  Churches. 

THE  settlement  at  Plymouth  affording  a  rendezvous  and  shelter 
to  adventurers  in  the  fisheries  and  the  trade  in  furs,  such  adven- 
turers began  immediately  to  swarm  all  along  the  northern  coasts 
of  New  England.  In  the  year  1624  about  fifty  ships  left  Eng- 
land for  such  adventures  upon  these  coasts.  At  this  period  there 
were  at  Plymouth  about  one  hundred  and  eighty  souls.  The 
town  was  impaled  about,  half  a  mile  in  compass.  On  the  hill 
they  had  a  fort  "  well  built  with  wood,  lime,  and  stone,"* 
Health  had  returned  to  the  colony ;  not  one  of  the  first  planters 
having  died  within  the  last  three  years.  This  year  they  had 
freighted  with  the  products  of  their  trade  and  industry,  a  ship  of 
180  tons.f 

The  adventurers  for  trade  and  commerce  had  now  turned 
their  thoughts  to  the  establishment  of  some  settlements  for  the 
furtherance  of  their  projects ;  when  Mr.  While,  a  Puritan  minis- 
ter of  Dorchester  in  England,  conceived  the  idea  of  making 
these  settlements  conducive  to  the  great  ends  of  planting  religion 
in  America.  A  plantation  was  commenced  at  Cape  Ann ;  and, 
soon  after,  its  management  was  committed  to  Mr.  Roger  Conant, 
a  "  pious,  sober,  prudent  man,"  from  among  the  colonists  at 
Plymouth.  In  1626  the  adventurers  threw  up  their  business  ii 
discouragement.  Mr.  White,  unwilling  that  so  good  a  design 
should  fail,  writes  to  Mr.  Conant,  that  if  he  and  three  others  will 
remain,  he  will  procure  them  a  patent,  send  them  men,  provi- 
sions, and  whatever  they  need  to  pursue  the  trade  with  the 
natives. 

Mr.  Conant  had,  before  this,  foreseen  that  the  persecuted  Puri- 

*  Prince.  t  Ibid. 


REMOVALS    TO    AMERICA.  217 

tans  in  England  must  soon  want  a  place  of  refuge.  Before  the 
settlement  of  Cape  Ann  was  given  up,  he  had  fixed  his  eye  upon 
Naumkeag,  now  Salem,  as  a  convenient  spot  for  such  a  settle- 
ment ;  and  had  communicated  his  views  to  his  friends  in  Eng- 
land. Upon  the  reception  of  Mr.  White's  letters,  he  told  his 
disheartened  companions,  that  he  "  Did  believe  God  would  make 
this  land  a  receptacle  for  his  people ;  and  if  they  should  leave 
him,  yet  he  would  not  stir,  for  he  was  confident  he  should  not 
long  want  company." 

Con  ant  and  his  companions  removed  to  "  Naumkeag,  a  plea- 
sant and  fruitful  neck  of  land,  embraced  on  each  side  with  an 
arm  of  the  sea,"*  and  awaited  the  coming  of  those  who,  they  fore- 
saw, must  soon  flee  from  the  storm  of  persecution  in  England. 
A  year  had  nearly  passed  after  their  removal,  when  some  friends 
in  Lincolnshire,  conversing  together  about  their  troubles,  turned 
their  thoughts  to  New  England.  Might  there  not  be  a  refuge 
there  ?  Might  they  not  plant  the  Gospel  there  ?  Might  they 
not  enjoy  there  freedom  of  conscience,  and  leave  the  ordinances 
of  religion  pure,  to  their  posterity  ?  "  We  imparted  our 
reasons,"  says  Dudley,  "  by  letters  and  messengers  to  some 
in  London  and  the  West  country."  A  purchase  was  made  from 
the  Council  for  New  England,  for  a  patent  for  a  belt  of 
land  from  three  miles  south  of  the  Charles  River,  to  three  miles 
north  of  the  Merrimac,  extending  from  Massachusetts  bay  to  the 
Pacific  Ocean.  White  sought  out  and  secured  such  associates 
as  could  be  relied  upon  for  the  great  enterprise  ;  men  of  religious 
fervor,  of  high  character,  of  enterprise,  courage,  and  unyielding 
perseverance.  Their  design  was  to  found  a  religious  settlement ; 
and  their  determination  was  to  colonize  "  the  best" 

On  the  20th  of  June,  1628,  Endicott  set  sail  from  Weymouth, 
in  England,  with  a  small  company,  to  make  way  for  the  settle- 
ment of  the  new  colonists.  In  September,  they  were  welcomed 
by  Conant  and  his  companions  to  the  new  settlement  amid  the 
forests  of  Salem.  Yet  what  will  not  the  restless  spirit  of  enter- 
prise and  adventure  do  ?  It  was  a  curious  prognostic  of  the  fu- 
ture character  of  American  pioneers,  that  of  the  little  band  which 
came  over  with  Endicott,  some  seven,  with  leave  of  the  governor, 
undertook  a  journey  through  the  woods  ;  and,  after  a  ramble  of 
twelve  miles,  lighted  on  the  present  site  of  Charlestown.  Here 
they  found  a  lonely  English  house,  thatched  and  palisadoed  ;  and 
here,  with  the  consent  of  the  Indian  Sachem,  they  began  a  set- 
tlement. Another  company  was  sent  over  to  Salem,  in  the  fall 
of  the  same  year,  to  make  further  preparation  for  the  expected 
colony.  In  February,  1628,  Mr.  Cradock,  at  London,  wrote  to 
Mr.  Endicott,  of  the  progress  of  things  at  home.  "  Our  company," 

*  Prince. 


218 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


said  he,  "  are  much  enlarged  :  there  is  one  store  ship  bought,  of 
100  tons  ;  two  more  hired  of  200  tons  ;  one  of  19,  the  other  of  20 
ordnance  ;  in  which  ships  are  likely  to  be  embarked  between  two 
and  three  hundred  persons,  and  about  100  head  of  cattle."  "  It 
is  resolved  to  send  two  ministers,  at  least,  with  the  ships  now  to 
be  sent :  those  we  shall  send  shall  be  by  approbation  of  Mr.  White, 
of  Dorchester,  and  Mr.  Davenport.  I  account  our  ships  will  be 
ready  to  sail  hence,  by  the  20th  of  next  month."* 

One  of  the  ministers  to  whom  the  company  made  application, 
was  Mr.  Higginson,  of  Leicester;  a  man  eminent  for  his  abilities, 
his  piety,  and  for  the  great  success  which  had  attended  his  min- 
istry. Says  Cotton  Mather,  "  Such  was  the  divine  presence  with, 
and  the  blessing  on  the  ministry  of  this  good  man  "  [in  Leices- 
ter], "  that  the  influence  thereof  on  the  whole  town  became  a 
matter  of  observation ;  many  were  turned  from  darkness  to  light, 
and  from  Satan  to  God :  *  and  there  was  a  notable  revival 

of  religion  among  them."  The  matter  of  Church  order  and  dis- 
cipline was  then  agitating  the  Church  of  England:  and  for  some 
years,  Higginson,  while  continuing  a  Conformist,  had  entertained 
scruples  of  conscience.  Pursuing  the  study  of  the  Scriptures, 
and  of  antiquity,  heat  length  came  out  a  conscientious  Non-Con- 
formist. He  still  retained  his  attachment  to  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, and  refused  to  separate,  though  he  could  no  longer  conform 
to  its  rituals.  Of  course,  he  could  no  longer  officiate  in  his  parish 
church.  By  the  favor  of  the  good  Bishop  Williams  and  of  the 
people  of  Leicester,  he  was  still  permitted  to  preach  the  Gospel,  till 
both  the  people  and  the  bishop  fell  under  the  vengeance  of  Laud. 
Even  then  the  authorities  of  the  town  chose  Mr.  Higginson  to  be 
their  town  preacher,  to  which  place  there  was  annexed  a  large 
maintenance  paid  out  of  the  town  treasury.  Mr.  Higginson 
thanked  them,  but  could  not  comply  with  the  necessary  condi- 
tions of  conformity.  "  Offers  were  made  him,"  says  Mather,  "  of  the 
greatest  and  richest  livings  of  the  country  thereabouts."  These 
he  declined  for  conscience'  sake.  He  still  endeavored  to  do  good 
in  private.  "  Many  resorted  to  him  for  his  counsel  and  advice  in 
regard  to  the  state  of  their  souls,  and  he  did  much  for  the  educa- 
tion of  scholars  going  to  or  coming  from  the  University ;  some 
of  whom  were  afterwards  among  the  most  eminent  ministers  of 
the  Gospel  in  England.  But  the  fury  of  Laud  could  not  suffer 
him  to  rest.  Complaints  were  laid  against  him,  "  so  that  he  lived 
in  continual  expectation  to  be  dragged  away  by  the  pursuivants 
to  the  High  Commission  Court ;  where,"  says  Mather,  "  a  sen- 
tence of  perpetual  imprisonment  was  the  best  thing  that  could 
be  looked  for." 

With  Higginson,  was  associated  Mr.  Samuel  Skelton,  another 

*  In  Prince. 


REMOVALS    TO    AMERICA.  219 

nonconformist  clergyman  of  Lincolnshire.  With  these,  came 
also  Mr.  Ralph  Smith,  who  became  the  first  pastor  of  the  Church 
at  Plymouth;  that  Church  having  lived  in  expectation  of  Mr. 
Robinson  for  some  years,  till  with  deep  sorrow,  they  heard  of 
his  death. 

It  was  in  the  beginning  of  May,  1629,  that  these  ships,  the 
"  George  Bonaventure"  the  "  Lion's  whelp"  and  the  "  Talbot" 
sailed  for  Massachusetts.  Three  more,  the  " Mayflower"  the 
"  Four-  Sisters"  and  the  "Pilgrim"  followed  them  in  the  begin- 
ning of  June.  When  the  first  of  these  fleets  came  opposite  to 
Larid's-end,  Mr.  Higginson  called  up  his  children  and  the  other 
passengers  to  take  their  last  view  of  England.  "  We  will  not 
say,"  exclaimed  Mr.  Higginson,  "  as  the  Separatists  are  wont  to 
say  at  their  leaving  England, — Farewell,  Babylon, — Farewell, 
Rome  ;•— but  we  will  say,  Farewell,  dear  England  :  Farewell,  the 
Church  of  God  in  England,  and  all  the  Christian  friends  there. 
We  do  not  go  to  New  England  as  Separatists  from  the  Church 
of  England,  though  we  cannot  but  separate  from  corruptions  in 
it;  but  we  go  to  practise  the  positive  part  of  Church  Reforma- 
tion, and  to  propagate  the  gospel  in  America."  He  concluded 
"  with  a  fervent  prayer  for  the  King,  the  Church,  and  state  in 
England,  and  for  the  blessing  of  God  with  themselves  in  their 
present  undertaking  for  New  England." 

After  a  pleasant  summer  voyage,  on  the  24th  of  June,  1629, 
they  entered  the  harbor  of  Salem,  and  descried  the  eight  or  ten 
hovels,  that  composed  the  town,  surrounded  by  a  few  corn-fields, 
and  the  dense  forest  beyond.  The  whole  body  of  planters  was 
now  three  hundred ;  of  whom  one-third  removed,  and  joined 
the  infant  settlement  at  Charlestown. 

The  Pilgrims  at  Plymouth  came  as  an  organized  Church; 
having  long  enjoyed  the  ordinances,  and  exercised  the  discipline 
of  a  Church,  separate  from  the  Church  of  England.  The  colo- 
nists at  Salem  had  continued  with  the  English  established 
Church  ; — Puritans,  and  suffering  for  nonconformity ;  but  never 
having  established  a  separate  Church  organization.  Bringing 
with  them  regularly  ordained  and  acknowledged  ministers  of  the 
Church  of  England,  they  had  contemplated  the  enjoyment  of 
Church  organization  and  ordinances :  nor  did  they  design  to  set 
up  again  those  things  in  their  Church  estate,  which  they  deemed 
unscriptural,  for  which  they  had  suffered  persecution,  and  to 
avoid  which  they  had  fled  from  their  native  land.  The  princi- 
ples of  Church  polity  had  been  long  and  earnestly  discussed  in 
England.  Mr.  Higginson  had  devoted  special  attention  to  this 
subject  for  years.  He  had  conferred  with  such  men  as  Thomas 
Hooker  and  Davenport ;  and,  with  the  great  mass  of  the  Puri- 
tans, he  had  come  to  the  conclusion,  that  in  several  important 


220  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

respects,  the  organization  of  the  English  Church  corresponded 
neither  with  the  scriptural  platform,  nor  with  the  earliest  antiquity 
of  the  Christian  Church.  The  people  who  carne  with  him, 
came  with  an  understanding  of  each  other's  views ;  they  expected 
to  set  up  a  Church  polity  differing  materially  from  that  of  the 
English  Church ;  yet,  before  their  voyage,  they  had  agreed  only 
on  this,  that  in  their  future  organization,  "  The  Reformation  of 
the  Church  was  to  be  endeavored  according  to  the  written  Word 
of  God." 

Being  now  arrived  at  their  destined  haven,  these  general  out- 
lines of  Church  polity  were  to  be  filled  up  ;  their  principles  were 
to  be  reduced  to  practice  ;  a  Church  was  to  be  organized  accor- 
ding to  the  pattern  set  forth  in  the  Word  of  God. 

Here  might  appear  to  be  room  for  great  discrepancies  of  opi- 
nion, and  great  difficulties  might  seem  to  lie  in  the  way  of  their 
coming  to  an  agreement,  as  to  what  are  the  principles  of  Church 
polity  delineated  in  the  Word  of  God.  These  discrepancies 
and  difficulties  were  not  found  in  practice.  The  Word  of  God 
was  found  so  plain  on  this  subject,  that  their  views  readily  har- 
monized on  every  practical  point,  as  soon  as  they  were  at  liberty 
to  throw  everything  else  away,  and  to  follow  the  Word  of  God 
as  their  only  authority.  They  had  been  bitterly  prejudiced 
against  the  settlers  at  Plymouth :  yet  it  is  remarkable  how  closely 
they  agreed  with  the  people  of  Plymouth  in  all  the  conclusions 
which  they  drew  concerning  Church  polity,  as  soon  as  they  set 
themselves  down  to  reduce  to  practice  the  scheme  to  be  drawn 
solely  from  the  Word  of  God.  No  less  remarkable  was  the 
unanimous  conclusion  to  which  scores  of  the  most  learned  min- 
isters in  England  arrived — who  had  either  independently,  or  with 
mutual  consultation,  set  themselves  to  collect  the  scheme  of 
Church  order  and  organization  recognized  in  the  New  Testament. 
Ten  years  brought  over,  as  we  have  seen,  no  less  than  seventy- 
seven  ministers,  who  had  all  been  clergymen  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  who  had  all  continued  their  connection  with  that 
Church  ;  having  never  set  up  a  separate  Church  organization  ; — 
all  of  whom  gave  up  every  earthly  emolument  and  comfort. ; — 
left  their  country  as  well  as  their  livings,  and  took  up  their  abode 
in  a  wilderness  for  the  sake  of  Gospel  truth  and  order  ;  and  all  of 
whom,  as  the  result  of  their  independent  study  of  the  Word  of 
God,  came  out  upon  the  platform  of  Church  government  which 
has  characterized  the  New  England  Churches  ever  since  that 
time. 

The  prejudices  of  the  Salem  colonists  against  the  Church  of 
Plymouth,  arose  from  the  mistaken  impression  that  the  people  of 
Plymouth  were  Separatists  and  Brownists ;  separating  not  merely 
from  the  world,  but  from  all  other  Churches  ;  and  that  they  held 


REMOVALS  TO  AMERICA.  221 

close  communion  against  all,  save  such  as  agreed  exactly  with 
themselves ;  adopting  the  peculiar  disorganizing  Independency 
of  Brown.  It  was  against  such  a  principle  of  separation  and 
close  communion,  that  Higginson  spake,  when  standing  on  the 
deck  and  taking  his  last  view  of  his  native  land,  he  exclaimed, 
"  We  will  not  say,  as  the  Separatists  were  wont  to  say, '  Farewell, 
Babylon  ;  farewell,  Rome;'  but,  farewell,  dear  England ;  farewell, 
dear  Church  of  God  in  England.  We  do  not  go  as  Separatists 
from  the  Church  of  England,  though  we  cannot  but  separate  from 
the  corruptions  in  it." 

Mr.  Higginson,  as  well  as  the  other  Puritans  who  had  remained 
in  England,  had  been  greatly  misinformed  concerning  the  princi- 
ples and  spirit  of  the  Pilgrim  Church,  both  at  Leyden  and  Ply- 
mouth. It  was  true  that  Robinson  had  in  his  early  years  been 
inclined  to  the  principles  of  the  Brownists  and  Separatists ;  but 
maturer  age  and  experience  had  corrected  his  errors ;  and  his 
views  had  become  enlarged  and  liberal  beyond  the  age.  Wins- 
low,  in  his  Brief  Narration,  written  some  years  after  the  removal 
to  Plymouth,  is  very  earnest  to  refute  the  slanderous  accusations 
which  had  been  circulated  by  their  enemies  in  England.  He 
bears  this  testimony  concerning  Mr.  Robinson  :  "  I  living  three 
years  under  his  ministry  before  we  began  the  work  of  plantation 
in  New  England,  it  was  always  against  separation  from  any 
other  of  the  Churches  of  Christ;  professing  and  holding  commu- 
nion both  with  the  French  and  Dutch  Churches  ;  yea,  tendering 
it  to  the  Scotch  also."  Against  the  constitution  and  government 
of  the  Church  of  England  ;  against  its  national  communion, 
mingled  up  of  worthy  and  unworthy — of  Christians  and  of  open 
blasphemers — Robinson  and  his  Church  never  ceased  to  bear 
witness.  But  he  ever  maintained  the  liveliest  esteem  for  Christ's 
people  in  the  Church  of  England,  and  never  shut  them  away 
from  the  rights  of  conscience  and  of  communion  which  he  claimed 
for  himself.  The  Pilgrim  Church  not  only  admitted  members  of 
the  Dutch  and  French  Churches  to  occasional  communion,  but 
received  them  into  their  Church.  A  minister  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland  having  fled  from  persecution  to  Leyden,  and  asking  the 
privilege  of  being  present  at  the  communion,  as  a  spectator,  Mr. 
Robinson  replied,  "Reverend  sir,  you  may  not  only  stay  to  be- 
hold us,  but  partake  with  us  ;  for  we  acknowledge  the  Churches 
of  Scotland  to  be  the  Churches  of  Christ :"  an  invitation  which  the 
Scotsman,  fearing  ecclesiastical  censure  at  home,  durst  not  ac- 
cept. When  Robinson  himself  could  not  go  to  America,  he 
advised  his  people  to  take  with  them  some  godly  minister  from 
England  :  "  For,"  said  he,  "  there  will  be  no  difference  between 
the  unconformable  ministers  and  you,  when  they  come  to  the 
practice  of  the  ordinances  out  of  the  kingdom."  "  And  so,"  says 


222  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Winslow,  u  he  advised  us  by  all  means  to  endeavor  to  close  with 
the  godly  party  of  the  kingdom  of  England,  and  rather  to  study 
union  than  disunion  ;  viz.  how  near  we  might  possibly  close 
without  sin."  Winslow  adds  :  "  If  any  joining  us  formerly, 
either  when  we  lived  at  Leyden,  in  Holland,  or  since  we  carne 
to  New  England,  have,  with  the  manifestation  of  their  faith  and 
profession  of  holiness,  held  forth  separation  from  the  Church  of 
England,  I  have  divers  times,  both  in  the  one  place  and  the  other, 
heard  either  Mr.  Robinson  or  Mr.  Brewster  stop  them  forthwith; 
showing  that  we  required  no  such  thing  at  their  hands,  but  only 
to  hold  forth  faith  in  Christ  Jesus,  holiness  in  the  fear  of  God, 
and  submission  to  every  ordinance  and  appointment  of  God, 
leaving  the  Church  of  England  to  themselves  and  to  the  Lord." 

Robinson  and  the  Pilgrim  Church  were  neither  separatists  noi 
schismatics.  They  were  ready  to  commune  on  equal  terms 
with  all  of  Christ's  people  of  every  name.  They  held  it  no 
schism  for  Christian  congregations  to  refuse  to  submit  to  or- 
dinances imposed  by  the  commandments  of  men.  If  any, 
claiming  authority  to  impose  rites  and  ceremonies  which  Christ 
has  not  ordained,  thrust  his  people  away  from  their  Lord's  table, 
forbid  them  to  worship,  deprive  them  of  their  goods,  and  send 
them  to  prison  or  into  banishment,  because  they  cannot  in  con- 
science practise  such  inventions  in  the  worship  of  God — they 
who  impose  such  things,  and  who  distract  the  Church  of  God — 
they  are  schismatics ;  not  those  who  simply  claim  the  natural 
right  to  worship  God  according  to  conscience  and  His  word. 

A  pleasing  incident,  in  which  it  is  easy  to  trace  the  overruling 
hand  of  Divine  Providence,  had  prepared  the  way  for  a  better 
acquaintance  between  the  colonists  of  Salem  and  those  of  Ply- 
mouth, and  for  that  friendly  intercourse  which  has  always  marked 
the  Puritan  Churches  of  New  England.  A  severe  sickness,  such 
as  is  incident  to  settlers  in  new  countries,  bad  fallen  upon  the 
pioneers  at  Salem ;  and  Endicott,  hearing  that  there  was  at  Ply- 
mouth a  physician  [Mr.  Fuller],  famous  for  his  skill  in  the 
diseases  of  the  country,  sent  to  the  governor  of  Plymouth,  entreat- 
ing that  Mr.  Fuller  might  come  to  their  assistance.  The  physi- 
cian hastened  to  Salem  ;  and  his  efforts  were  crowned  with  great 
success.  He  was  a  pious  man,  deacon  of  the  church  at  Ply- 
mouth, intelligent,  well  able  to  give  an  account  of  the  polity  of 
the  Plymouth  Church,  and  to  show  its  warrant  from  the  Word 
of  God.  The  prejudices  of  Endicott  and  of  his  associates  were 
removed.  They  discovered  that  the  principles  of  the  Plymouth 
Church  were  none  other  than  those,  at  which  the  Puritans  of  old 
England  had  already  arrived  after  a  careful  searching  of  the 
Word  of  God. 

These  things  were  transpiring  while  Mr.  Higginson  and  his 


CHURCHES    ORGANIZED.  223 

company  were  yet  on  the  waters ;  and  while  they  were  yet  on 
their  way,  Endicott  wrote  to  Governor  Bradford,  at  Plymouth, 
expressing  his  gratitude  for  the  timely  aid.  "  I  rejoice,"  said  he, 
"  that  I  am  by  him  [Mr.  Fuller]  satisfied  touching  your  judg- 
ments of  the  outward  form  of  God's  worship.  It  is,  so  far  as  I 
can  gather,  no  other  than  is  warranted  by  the  evidence  of  truth  ; 
and  the  same  which  I  have  professed  and  maintained  ever  si  nee 
the  Lord  in  mercy  revealed  himself  to  me ;  being  far  from  the 
common  report  that  hath  been  spread  of  you  touching  that  par- 
ticular; but  God's  children  must  not  look  for  less  here  below."* 

Mr.  Higginson  and  his  company  having  arrived,  frequent  con- 
versations were  held  concerning  the  method  to  be  pursued  in 
organizing  the  Church  ;  till  the  method  was  agreed  upon  by 
common  consent.  By  vote  of  the  congregation,  Mr.  Shelton 
was  chosen  pastor,  and  Mr.  Higginson  teacher.  A  day  was  ap- 
pointed for  organizing  the  Church  and  installing  their  ministers. 
Letters  were  sent  to  the  Church  at  Plymouth,  requesting  them 
to  attend  by  their  delegates  for  friendly  counsel  and  aid.  This 
practice  of  sending  for  the  counsel  and  aid  of  neighboring 
Churches  on  such  occasions  became,  from  that  time,  one  of 
the  settled  customs  of  the  New  England  Churches ;  and  in  own- 
ing and  observing  their  obligation  to  observe  such  a  fraternal 
intercourse  and  communion,  in  which  each  Church  shall,  on 
occasions  of  common  interest,  seek  the  aid  and  counsel  of 
sister  Churches,  as  well  as  hear  their  remonstrances,  and  be 
ready  to  give  an  account  of  their  doings — these  Congregational 
Churches  differ  from  Independents.^ 

In  the  mean  time,  thirty  persons  are,  by  common  consent, 
chosen  out  of  the  whole  number  of  communicants,  to  be  the  first 
to  enter  into  covenant  and  to  begin  the  foundation  of  the  new 
Church.  A  confession  and  covenant  are  drawn  up  ;  thirty  copies 
are  written  out;  each  of  the  thirty  persons  is  called  upon  to 
ponder  these  engagements  and  to  prepare  himself  for  such  a 
solemn  transaction.  On  the  appointed  day  the  thirty  come  forth, 
and  own  the  confession  and  covenant  in  the  presence  of  the 
congregation  and  of  Almighty  God.  Then  the  ministers  are 
installed.  Mr.  Higginson,  and  a  chosen  number  of  brethren  in 
the  Church — elders  in  age,  and  for  this  special  work  chosen  as 
the  elders  [Presbyters]  of  the  Church, — lay  their  hands  on  Mr. 
Shelton  with  solemn  prayer.  Then  Mr.  Shelton  and  the  persons 
chosen  lay  their  hands  on  Mr.  Higginson.J  Both  of  these  hav- 

*  Prince.  f  Ibid, 

J  The  Colonists  at  Salem  had  from  the  first  treated  Messrs.  Higginson  and  Shel- 
ton with  the  courtesies  due  to  acknowledged  ministers  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
So  with  the  seventy-seven  who  had  been  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
who  were  within  a  few  years  from  this  time  installed  as  pastors  and  teachers  of  the 
Puritan  Churches  in  New  England ;  they  were  treated  with  the  consideration  due 


224  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ing  long  been  acknowledged  minister?,  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, I  suppose  that  even  Prelatists  could  have  nothing  to 
object  against  their  ordination.  The  Church  and  congregation 
recognized  no  right,  in  any  other  human  authority,  to  set  over 
them  pastors  and  teachers  save  by  their  own  choice.  The  act 
of  installation,  or  induction,  was  no  doubt  sufficiently  formal  and 
regular  to  make  it  valid  in  the  sight  of  God  and  man.  Can  any 
tell  why  this  Church,  so  gathered  in  the  wilderness,  and  so  fur- 
nished with  pastors,  was  not  a  regular  and  proper  Church  1  Can 
any  show  it  to  be  otherwise,  on  any  principle  of  God's  Word, 
or  of  common  sense  ;  or  on  any  grounds  that  do  not  involve  the 
grossest  absurdities  1 

It  may  be  interesting  here  to  give  some  extracts  from  the 
Covenant  on  which  the  Church  at  Salem  was  formed.  It  is  a 
fair  specimen  of  the  covenants  on  which  the  Puritan  Churches 
were  generally  organized,  and  which  still  remain  in  use  among 
the  Puritan  New  England  Churches.*  "  We  covenant  with  our 
Lord  and  with  one  another,  and  we  do  bind  ourselves  in  the 
presence  of  God,  to  walk  together  in  all  his  ways,  according  as 
he  is  pleased  to  reveal  himself  unto  us  in  his  blessed  Word  of 
truth  :  and  do  especially,  in  the  name  and  fear  of  God,  profess 
and  protest  to  walk  as  followeth,  through  the  power  and  grace 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  *  *  "  We  avouch  the  Lord  to  be 

to  ministers  ;  but  they  were  allowed  no  official  prerogatives  in  the  Churches  with- 
out election  and  an  induction,  which  was  then  styled  Ordination,  but  afterwards 
more  properly  Installation ;  and  the  ceremony  is  now  performed  "without  the 
laying  on  of  hands.  The  Churches,to  secure  their  franchises  from  priestly  as  well 
as  from  prelatic  usurpation,  allowed  no  ministers  save  their  own  pastors  and 
teachers  to  officiate  for  them  without  an  invitation.  The  elders  or  deacons  would 
say  in  such  cases, — "  If  ye  have  any  word  of  exhortation,  say  on."  The  formality 
is  laid  aside,  but  the  principle  is  still  preserved.  No  strange  minister  officiates  in 
our  churches  on  his  own  prerogatives  as  a  minister,  but  only  on  invitation  uf  the 
Church  or  its  constituted  authorities.  Many  of  the  early  settlers  of  New  England, 
held  with  Mr.  Cotton,  the  extreme  opinion  that  a  "  minister  hath  no  power  to  give 
the  seals"  [Baptism,  &c.]  "but  in  his  own  congregation." 

*  Each  Church  has  also  a  summary  of  the  essential  doctrines  of  the  Gospel, 
which  each  person  received  into  the  Church,  solemnly  and  publicly  owns  as  his 
Confession  of  Faith.  All  that  is  essential  to  entitle  any  Church  to  the  privileges  of 
this  community  of  Puritan  Churches,  so  far  as  doctrine  is  concerned,  is,  that  its 
Confession  of  Faith  substantially  corresponds  either  with  the  Savoy  Confession, 
the  Confession  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  the  Assembly's  Shorter  Catechism,  or 
with  the  doctrinal  part  of  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England.  There  is  a  sur- 
prising agreement  between  the  several  Confessions  formed  by  the  Protestants  of  all 
countries  about  the  same  age.  The  Augsburg  of  1530  ;  the  Second  Helvetic,  framed 
in  1536  ;  the  French,  drawn  up  and  adopted  by  a  Synod  held  in  Paris  in  1559;  the 
Belgic,  of  1563;  the  Bohemian  or  Waldensiden,  of  1573;  the  Baptist,  by  the 
seven  Baptist  Churches  of  London  in  1646;  the  Westminster  of  1643;  the  Savoy 
(at  the  Savoy  in  London),  in  1658,  and  the  English  Articles  of  1562;— these  are 
substantially  the  same  in  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Gospel.  The  Reformers 
of  all  countries  going  to  the  Bible  alone,  and  each  for  himself;  all  substantially 
agreed  as  to  the  great  scheme  of  truth  laid  down  in  the  Word  of  God.  What  an 
argument  for  the  truth  of  these  doctrines  ;  and  what  a  reproach  to  the  present  Ar- 
minianism  of  the  English  Church,  so  contrary  to  the  manifest  sense  of  her  Articles, 
as  evinced  by  the  concurrent  testimony  of  all  Protestant  divines  of  that  day ! 


CHURCHES    ORGANIZED.  225 

our  God,  and  ourselves  to  be  his  people,  in  the  truth  and  sim- 
plicity of  our  spirits."  *  *  "  We  give  ourselves  to  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Word  of  his  grace,  for  the  teaching,  ruling, 
and  sanctifying  us  in  matters  of  worship  and  conversation  ;  re- 
solving to  cleave  unto  him  alone  for  life  and  glory,  and  to  reject 
all  contrary  ways,  canons,  and  constitutions  of  men  in  his  wor- 
ship. We  promise  to  walk  with  our  brethren  with  all  watchful- 
ness and  tenderness ;  avoiding  jealousies  and  suspicions,  back- 
bitings,  censurings,  provokings,  secret  risings  of  the  spirit  against 
them ;  but  in  all  offences  to  follow  the  rule  of  our  Lord  Jesus, 
and  to  bear  and  forbear,  give  and  forgive,  as  he  hath  taught  us." 

In  the  remaining  Articles,  they  engaged  for  orderly  walk  with 
the  Church  ;  to  study  the  advancement  of  the  Gospel  in  all  truth 
and  peace ;  to  be  orderly  citizens  ;  to  approve  themselves  dili- 
gent in  their  callings  ;  and  unto  the  best  of  their  ability  to  teach 
their  children  and  households,  the  knowledge  and  fear  of  God. 
"  All  this,"  said  they,  "  we  promise  not  by  any  strength  of  our 
own,  but  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  whose  blood  we  desire  may 
sprinkle  this  our  covenant  made  in  his  name."* 

The  remarks  of  the  historian  Bancroft  upon  this  transaction, 
are  worthy  to  be  repeated : — "  The  emigrants  were  not  so  much 
a  body  politic,  as  a  Church  in  the  wilderness ;  with  no  benefac- 
tor around  them  but  nature,  no  present  sovereign  but  God.  An 
entire  separation  was  made  between  State  and  Church  ;  religious 
worship  was  established  on  the  basis  of  the  independence  of 
each  separate  religious  community ;  all  officers  of  the  church 
were  elected  by  its  members  ;  and  these  rigid  Calvinists,  of 
whose  rude  intolerance  the  world  has  been  filled  with  malignant 
calumnies,  subscribed  a  covenant  cherishing,  it  is  true,  the  sever- 
est virtues,  but  without  one  tinge  of  fanaticism.  It  was  an  act 
of  piety,  not  of  study  ;  it  favored  virtue,  not  superstition  ;  inqui- 
ry, not  submission.  The  people  were  enthusiasts,  but  not  bigots." 
"  The  doctrine  and  discipline  established  at  Salem  re- 
mained the  rule  of  Puritan  New  England." 

The  Church  at  Salem  refused  to  receive  to  its  communion 
some  persons  of  scandalous  life,  and  exercised  discipline  upon 
some  who  had  committed  offences.  Upon  this  a  few  gathered 
together ;  set  up  separate  worship  with  the  use  of  the  book  of 
Common  Prayer,  and  complained  that  the  Church  used  neither 
that  nor  the  ceremonies  prescribed  by  the  Church  of  England. 
Their  conduct  was  deemed  inconsistent  with  the  safety  of  the 
infant  colony  :  the  governor  rebuked  them  as  guilty  of  mutiny 
and  faction,  and  ordered  them  back  by  the  return  of  the  ships 
to  England.  This  was  meting  the  adherents  of  the  Church  of 
England  with  the  Church  of  England's  own  measure.  What- 

*  Mather. 
15 


226  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

ever  extenuation  mcry  be  pleaded  from  the  exigencies  and  new- 
ness of  the  colony,  from  the  law  of  necessity,  lest  this  effort  in 
oehalf  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  these  claims  of  the  obli- 
gations of  the  colonists  to  observe  its  forms,  should  end  in  the 
subversion  of  the  colonial  liberty  to  worship  God  according  to 
their   conscience    (for  such  was  the  scope  of  these  new  claims, 
if  not  the  design  of  the  claimants)  ;  whatever  may  be  said  in  pal- 
liation, from  their  not  having  had  time  fully  to  free  their  minds 
from   the  prejudices  which  they  had  been  taught  in  their  native 
land ;     it  must  be  confessed  that  in  this  proceeding,  as  in  some 
others  of  a  later  date,  the   Puritan  colonists  acted  inconsistently 
with  their  principles.     But  with  them  it  was  not  so  much  a  ques- 
tion of  toleration  as  of  the  maintenance  or  defeat  of  the  very  de- 
sign of  their  emigration  ;  they  were  well  assured  that  if  the  mal- 
contents could  succeed  in  their  designs,  they  themselves  would 
not  much  longer  be  allowed  their  freedom  in  the  worship  of  God. 
The  returning  ships  carried  home  such  accounts  from  the  pen 
of  Higginson,  and  of  others  of  the  emigrants,  as  awakened  deep 
interest  among  the  persecuted  Puritans  of  England.     They  had 
suffered  almost  beyond  endurance ;  but  they  had  seen  no  mode 
of  escape,  without  running  into  hardships  and  perils  that  seemed 
almost  certain  destruction.     Now  the  way  appeared  open ;  and 
the  more  so  when  it  was  determined  that  the  charter  and  man- 
agement of  the  new  domains  were  to  be  transferred  to  America. 
Cotton  Mather  justly  describes  the  enthusiasm  raised  in  England 
when  he  says,—"  Briefly  the  God  of  Heaven  served,  as  it  were, 
a  summons  upon  the  spirits  of  his  people  in  the  English  nation ; 
stirring  up  the  spirits   of  thousands  who  never  saw  the  face  of 
each  other,  with  a  most  unanimous  inclination  to  leave  all  the 
pleasant  accommodations  of  their  native  country,  and  go  over  a 
terrible  ocean,  with  a  more  terrible  desert,  for  the  pure  enjoyment 
of  all  his  ordinances." 

Before  the  end  of  1629,  a  congregational  Church  was  gathered 
at  Plymouth  in  England,  of  which  Mr.  John  Wareham,  a 
famous  preacher  of  Exeter,  and  Mr.  John  Maverick,  were  chosen 
ministers.  Great  preparations  are  made  for  removing  to  New 
England.  Men,  women  and  children  are  gathered,  a  chosen 
company;  Winthrop  is  made  governor  of  the  new  colony.  In 
February,  1630,  the  good  ship  Lion  sails  from  Bristol.  The 
Mary  and  John  leaves  Plymouth  on  the  20th  of  March.  On  the 
29th  of  March,  Winthrop  with  Johnson  and  other  leading  men, 
in  the  Arabella  of  350  tons,  28  guns,  and  52  seamen,  the  Talbot, 
the  Ambrose  and  the  Jewel,  leave  the  port  of  Cowes ;  the  May- 
flower,  the  Wfiale^  the  William  and  Frances^  the  Tryal,  the 
Charles^  the  Success,  and  the  Hopewell,  lying  at  Hampton,  not 
yet  ready.  Winthrop  and  his  fleet  had  been  informed,  at  the 


CHURCHES  ORGANIZED.  227 

Isle  of  Wight,  that  "  ten  Spanish  ships,  with  brass  guns,  the 
Jeast  of  which  was  thirty,"  were  waiting  to  intercept  them.  On 
the  10th  of  April,  they  discover  several  ships  bearing  towards 
them,  and  "  provide  to  fight  them  ;"  but  these  prove  to  be  the 
remainder  of  their  fleet  from  Hampton.  On  Saturday,  the  12th 
of  June,  at  two  in  the  morning,  the  Arabella,  admiral  of  the  fleet, 
"  finding  her  port  near,  shoots  off  two  pieces  of  ordnance ;" 
and  descrying  the  Lion,  which  had  arrived  before  her,  "  sends 
the  skiff  aboard,"  stands  in  towards  the  harbor,  and  comes  to 
anchor.  "  Mr.  Pierce,  master  of  the  Lion,"  says  Governor  Win- 
throp,  "  comes  presently  to  us,  but  returns  to  fetch  Mr.  Endicott, 
who  with  Mr.  Skelton  and  Captain  Levit,  come  aboard  us  about 
two  o'clock.  And  with  them,  this  afternoon,  the  governor,  with 
those  assistants  on  board  the  Admiral,  and  some  other  gentlemen 
and  gentlewomen,"  go  ashore  to  their  friends  at  Salem.  "Many 
of  the  other  people  also,  landing  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  har- 
bor, regale  themselves  with  strawberries,  wherewith  the  woods 
are  everywhere  in  these  times  replenished." 

Next  morning,  Masconomo,  the  Sagamore  of  that  side  of  the 
country  towards  Cape  Ann,  comes  on  board  the  Admiral  to  bid 
him  welcome.  In  the  afternoon  arrives  the  Jewell.  Monday, 
June  14,  the  Admiral  weighs,  is  warped  into  the  inner  harbor, 
and  in  the  afternoon  most  of  the  passengers  go  ashore  ;  but  find 
the  colony  in  an  unexpected  and  sad  condition  ;  more  than  eighty 
having  died  in  the  preceding  winter,  many  of  the  remainder  being 
feeble  or  sick,  and  the  stock  of  corn  hardly  sufficient  to  feed 
them  a  fortnight.  The  governor  and  principal  men  leave  to 
find  out  a  place  for  settlement.  At  Nantasket  they  find  the  ship 
Mary  and  John.  The  Ambrose  reaches  Salem  before  their  re- 
turn. The  Mayflower  and  Whale  reach  Charlestown  on  the  1st 
of  July  ;  the  Talbot,  on  the  2d  ;  the  William  and  Frances  on  the 
3d  ;  the  Tryal  and  Charles,  on  the  5th  ;  the  Success  on  the  6th  ; 
the  Hopewell  comes  at  last ;  and  on  Thursday,  July  8,  they  keep 
a  public  thanksgiving  "  throughout  all  their  plantations,  to  praise 
Almighty  God  for  all  his  goodness  and  wonderful  works  towards 
them." 

Among  these  emigrants  were  Winthrop,  Ludlow,  Rossiter, 
Johnson,  with  his  wife,  the  Lady  Arabella,  whose  story  is  so 
touchingly  remembered  in  all  the  annals  of  New  England  ; 
Wilson,  Philips,  Warham,  Pynchon,  Bradstreet,  Dudley,  and 
many  others  whose  honored  names  are  yet  perpetuated  among 
the  families  of  New  England.  "  Some  of  these,"  says  Prince, 
"  set  forth  from  the  west  of  England,  but  ,the  greatest  numbers 
came  from  about  London,  though  Southampton  was  the  place 
of  rendezvous  where  they  took  ship.  These  were  they  who  first 
came  to  set  up  Christian  Churches  in  this  heathen  wilderness." 


223  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

It  is  not  my  design  to  trace  the  history  of  the  new  settlements, 
nor  to  give  any  further  account  of  the  gathering  of  the  early 
Churches,  nor  of  the  distinguished  men  who  labored  in  the  work 
of  the  ministry  during  the  early  times  of  the  New  England  His- 
tory. Norton,  Cotton,  Shepard,  Stone,  Elliot,  Hooker,  Daven- 
port ;  these  are  a  constellation  of  names  which  would  have  dis- 
tinguished any  age  or  country  in  any  period  of  the  Christian 
Church.  Nor  were  these  alone.  The  seventy-seven  ministers, 
who  left  England  and  the  English  Church  for  conscience'  sake, 
were  all  choice  men.  Those  who  came  over  the  ocean  left  not 
their  superiors  behind  ;  nor  has  the  splendor  of  their  character, 
their  talents,  and  their  piety  ever  been  eclipsed,  either  in 
Old  England,  or  among  the  descendants  of  those  to  whom 
they  ministered  in  the  Western  Wilds.  They  laid  the  founda- 
tions of  learning  and  religion  well.  New  England,  America, 
the  world,  has  already  reaped,  and  is  still  to  reap  in  larger  mea- 
sures, the  fruits  of  their  sagacity,  their  piety,  and  their  self-deny- 
ing toil.  Sufferings  awaited  them;  diseases,  dangers,  and  death, 
stood  thick  around  the  devoted  colonists  ;  yet,  in  the  words  of 
Bancroft,  "  As  the  brightest  lightnings  are  kindled  in  the 
darkest  clouds,  the  general  distress  did  but  augment  the  piety 
and  confirm  the  fortitude  of  the  colonists.  Their  enthusiasm 
was  softened  by  the  mildest  sympathy  with  suffering  human- 
ity ;  while  a  sincere  faith  kept  guard  against  despondency  and 
weakness.  Not  a  hurried  line,  not  a  trace  of  repining  appears 
in  their  records ;  the  congregations  always  assembled  at  the 
stated  times,  whether  in  open  fields  or  under  the  shade  of  an 
ancient  tree  ;  in  the  midst  of  want  they  abounded  in  hope ;  in 
the  solitudes  of  the  wilderness  they  believed  themselves  in  com- 
pany with  the  Greatest  and  most  Benevolent  of  Beings." 

The  emigrations  continued.  The  plantations  and  churches 
spread  abroad.  Within  twelve  years,  about  one  hundred  and 
ninety-eight  ships  were  employed  in  bringing  over  Ilie  founders 
of  New  England,  and  by  the  gnnrLprpvidence  of  Gmj^only  one 
of  those  ships  miscarried  by  the  way. 


XVII. 


RISE  OF  THE  CIVIL  WARS. 

Charles  a  martyr  to  his  own  insincerity  and  crimes.  Attempts  to  impose 
a  Liturgy  upon  Scotland.  Uproar  in  St.  Giles'.  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant.  The  Episcopal  War  Charles  forced  to  call  a  Parliament. 
Laud  impeached.  Divine  right  of  Episcopacy  discussed.  Smectym- 
nuus.  Irish  Massacre.  Appeal  to  Arms. 

THE  English  Church  celebrates  the  "  Martyrdom  of  King 
Charles  /."  But  in  no  sense  did  King  Charles  sacrifice  his  life 
for  the  cause  of  religion.  His  political  crimes  against  the  laws 
and  the  Constitution  ;  his  falsehoods  and  treacheries ;  his  utter 
want  of  faith  in  his  solemn  engagements  to  his  indignant  people  ; 
these  were  the  causes  of  his  ruin.  His  people  found  no  redress, 
save  in  arms :  and  when  their  monarch  was  overthrown,  his 
known  insincerity  and  treachery  forbade  them  to  hope  for  any 
safety  but  in  his  death.  King  Charles  was  a  martyr  to  his  own 
insincerity  and  crimes.  He  fell,  in  endeavoring  to  erect  an 
absolute  despotism  over  a  free-spirited  and  indignant  people. 
He  had  cast  his  life  upon  the  die;  and  either  his  people 
must  be  reduced  to  slavery,  or  he  must  perish :  there  was  no 
other  possible  alternative.  But  perhaps  by  the  celebration  of 
his  "  martyrdom"  it  is  designed  to  intimate  that  he  lost  his  life 
in  the  cause  of  "  The  Church"  or  (which  they  claim  as  the  same 
thing)  of  Episcopacy  ;  which  High  Churchmen  seem  to  consider 
as  nearly  synonymous  with  religion.  How  then  was  Charles  a 
martyr  for  "  the  Church  ?"  Under  the  covert  of  his  authority,  cor- 
ruptions were  introduced  into  its  doctrines ;  a  wide  and  funda- 
mental departure  was  made  from  the  original  sense  of  its  articles  ; 
its  rites  and  ceremonies  were  nearly  assimilated  to  those  of  Rome. 
The  power  of  the  prelates  was  greatly  augmented  at  the  expense 
both  of  the  royal  prerogatives  and  of  the  popular  rights.  Charles 
was  one  of  those  kings,  who  in  this  manner  delight  to  "  Give  their 
glory  to  the  Beast."  In  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  the  bishops 
were  content  to  hold  even  their  spiritual  superiority  over  presby- 
ters, from  the  civil  power.  But  in  passing  sentence  on  Bastwick, 
the  bishops,  with  the  allowance  of  Charles,  denied  that  they  held  the 


- 

230  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

jurisdiction  of  their  courts  from  the  king.  At  the  instance  of  Laud, 
Charles  permitted  the  bishops  to  hold  their  ecclesiastical  courts  in 
their  own  names,  without  the  king's  letters  patent  under  the  great 
seal.  The  design  of  this  was  fully  to  realize  the  idea  that  bishops 
hold  their  authority  not  from  the  crown,  but,  jure  divino,  from  God 
himself.  Half  the  business  of  Chancery  was  drawn  into  the 
hands  of  the  bishops'  officers.  The  king  allowed  the  bishops  to 
frame  new  articles  of  visitation,  and  to  administer  new  oaths  of 
inquiry.  "  In  this  manner,"  says  Hetherington,*  "  the  prelates 
became  possessed  of  extensive  jurisdiction,  both  civil  and  eccle- 
siastical, not  only  independent  of  the  Crown  and  Parliament,  but 
based  upon  the  assumption  of  a  divine  right)  which  rendered 
them  entirely  irresponsible,  and  beyond  the  control  of  human 
law.  Had  not  the  spirit  of  liberty,  civil  and  religious,  been  at 
that  time  vigilant  and  strong,  these  prelatic  usurpations  must 
have  soon  reduced  England  to  a  state  of  the  most  abject 
slavery." 

For  this  abject  devotion  to  the  interests  of  an  aspiring  and 
domineering  hierarchy,  the  prelates  of  the  Church  of  England 
have  had  the  addressee  persuade  the  people  of  that  Church  to 
forget  the  crimes  of  King  Charles,  and  to  celebrate  him  as  a  saint 
and  martyr ! 

They  have  a  further  show  of  reason  for  so  doing,  from  the  fact 
that  it  was  the  foolish  attempt  of  Charles  to  impose  an  Episco- 
pacy and  a  Liturgy  upon  Scotland  that  roused  up  the  civil  wars, 
which  overturned  Episcopacy  "  root  and  branch,"  and  in  which 
the  king  lost  both  throne  and  life. 

Freedom  still  breathed  amid  the  hills  of  Scotland.  A  hierarchy 
had  be.en  established  there,  but  its  prelates  were  prelates  only  in 
name  ;  circumscribed  and  watched  by  a  jealous  and  undaunted 
people,  while  the  ministers  of  the  Scottish  Church  regarded 
episcopal  jurisdiction  as  a  mere  mischievous  usurpation. 

Laud  now  persuaded  the  king  that  it  would  be  a  good  and 
pious  work  to  establish  a  liturgy  and  Episcopacy  in  full  form  over 
the  people  of  Scotland.  A  liturgy  was  prepared,  modelled 
mainly  after  the  English,  but  altered  and  fashioned  in  such  a 
way  as  to  suit  the  genius  of  Laud,  and  of  a  cast  more  popish 
than  that  of  England.  In  the  office  for  the  Lord's  Supper  (which 
was  made  closely  to  resemble  a  mass),  the  priest,  taking  the 
bread  and  wine  into  his  hands,  and  reciting  the  words  of  the 
original  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  is  made  to  say,  "  WHICH 

WE   NOW  OFFER   UNTO  THEE   THAT  THEY  MAY  BECOME   THE 
BODY  AND  BLOOD  OF  THY  MOST  DEARLY  BELOVED  SON  J   *  * 

these  words  being  printed  in  large  capitals  to  mark  their  signifi- 
cance."!    The  compilers  of  this  liturgy  were  ordered  to  retain 
#  London  Christian  Observer,  April  1843.        \  Hist.  Assembly  of  Divines. 


RISE  OF  THE  CIVIL  WARS.  231 

such  Catholic  saints  in  the  calendar  as  were  retained  in  the 
English ;  and  in  no  case  to  omit  St.  George  and  St.  Patrick. 
Sundry  lessons  out  of  the  Apocrypha  were  inserted.*  "  There 
was  a  benediction  or  thanksgiving  for  departed  saints,  and  ru- 
bricks  were  added  instructing  the  people  when  to  sit,  when  to 
stand,  and  when  to  kneel." 

Such  was  the  Liturgy  sent  up  to  be  imposed  upon  the  people 
of  Scotland.  Due  notice  was  given  ;  and  on  the  Sabbath,  July 
23,  1637,  in  the  great  church  of  St.  Giles,  was  assembled  a 
mighty  concourse  of  people,  with  both  the  archbishops,  several 
bishops,  lords  and  magistrates,  to  witness  the  setting  up  of  the 
new  liturgy.  The  dean,  arrayed  in  his  surplice,  began  the  service. 
No  sooner  had  he  opened  the  book  than  there  began  a  mighty 
uproar  among  the  lowest  of  the  people  ;  clapping  of  hands,  cries 
of  "  A  pape — a  pape,"  "  Antichrist — antichrist.''  The  Bishop 
of  Edinburgh  stepped  forward  to  the  pulpit,  hoping  to  appease 
the  people.  A  resolute  Scots  woman  hurled  a  stool  at  his  head, 
shouting,  "  What,  ye  villain  ;  will  ye  say  mass  in  my  lug  ?"  "  A 
pape — a  pape,"  cried  the  multitude.  The  magistrates  succeeded, 
partly  by  force,  in  expelling  the  people,  and  the  dean  went  on 
with  the  service,  while  a  rapping  at  the  doors,  and  throwing 
of  stones,  and  cries  of  "  A  pape — a  pape,"  were  kept  up  by  the 
populace  without. 

The  lords  of  the  council,  who  knew  what  stuff  Scotsmen  were 
made  of,  feared  to  attempt  the  reading  of  the  Liturgy  again. 
When  the  news  reached  Laud,  he  was  furious,  and  hastened  a 
message  blaming  them  for  suspending  the  Liturgy,  and  requiring 
its  continuance.  Again  the  indignant  people  poured  into  Edin- 
burgh. The  prelates'  lives  were  in  danger;  nor  would  the  peo- 
ple disperse  till  the  council  had  promised  to  join  with  the  other 
lords  in  petitioning  the  king  against  the  service  book.  The  king 
issued  his  proclamation,  forbidding  any  more  such  petitions  on 
pain  of  high  treason.  The  barons,  ministers,  and  burghers,  as- 
sembled and  signed  a  declaration  of  rights. 

The  hot  blood  of  the  Scots  was  now  cooled.  There  were  no 
more  tumults;  but  cool  and  wary,  every  countenance  bore  the 
marks  of  a  determination  never  to  be  overcome.  The  nation 
renevvedly  entered  into  the  solemn  league  and  covenant,  subscrib- 
ing with  their  hands  their  confession  of  faith,  declaring  their 
abhorrence  of  all  kinds  of  papistry ;  of  all  rites  and  traditions 
brought  into  the  kirk  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God.  These 
things  they  engaged  to  oppose  to  their  utmost  power  ;  "  and  to 
defend  the  ancient  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  kirk  all  the 

*  The  English  book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  also  the  American  Prayer- Book,  still 
directs  sundry  portions  of  the  Apocrypha  to  be  read  as  portions  of  the  Word  of  God! 
See  "  TABLES  OF  LESSONS  FOE  HOLY  DAYS." 


232  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

days  of  their  lives,  under  the  pains  contained  in  the  law,  and 
danger  both  of  body  and  soul  in  the  day  of  God's  fearful  judg- 
ment." 

Every  threatening  and  artifice  the  king  tried,  to  move  the  Scots 
from  their  determination,  but  it  was  all  in  vain.  The  Scots  had 
taken  their  stand.  The  king  was  forced  to  allow  the  calling  of 
a  general  assembly,  but  when  that  assembly  was  found  intracta- 
ble, he  dissolved  it,  and  forbade  the  members  to  continue  their 
session  under  the  pains  of  high  treason. 

The  assembly  continued  its  sessions.  The  episcopacy,  the 
high  commission,  the  cannons,  the  liturgy,  were  thrown  down 
and  abolished.  Like  the  acts  of  the  Continental  Congress  in  the 
American  Revolution,  the  acts  of  that  assembly  were  sustained 
by  the  determination  of  the  people,  and  were  therefore  law. 
"  Thus,"  says  Hume,  "  the  whole  fabric  which  James  and 
Charles,  in  a  course  of  years,  had  been  rearing  with  so  much 
care  and  policy,  fell  to  the  ground." 

You  will  fix  in  your  minds  the  chronology  of  these  events,  by 
observing  that  they  were  cotemporaneous  with  the  first  settle- 
ments in  Connecticut.  These  things  occurred  between  the  time 
when  the  few  adventurers  came  through  the  wilderness  from 
Watertown,  in  Massachusetts,  and  began  the  settlement  of 
Weathersfield  in  1635,  and  the  beginning  of  the  plantation  of 
New  Haven  in  1638. 

And  now  King  Charles  approaches  the  crisis  that  decides  his 
final  destiny.  He  proclaims  his  determination  to  take  the  field 
in  person  against  the  Scots  Covenanters.  The  principal  nobility 
are  summoned  to  attend  his  Majesty.  Every  power  of  the  pre- 
rogative is  exerted  to  raise  men  and  money.  The  bishops  exhort 
the  clergy  to  liberal  efforts  for  his  Majesty's  support  in  what  they 
do  not  scruple  to  call  "  The  Episcopal  War"  The  archbishop 
writes  for  a  contribution  from  the  civil  courts ;  requiring  his  com- 
missary to  send  him  the  names  of  such  as  should  refuse.  The 
queen  and  her  friends  undertake  for  the  Roman  Catholics  ;  who 
well  approve  their  zeal  and  liberality  in  so  holy  a  cause.  The 
English  nation  is  roused  to  a  crusade  for  forcing  bishops  and  a 
Liturgy  upon  the  poor  Scots ;  whose  resources  in  money  are 
nothing ;  and  who  have  not  three  thousand  stand  of  arms  in  the 
nation. 

Every  pulpit  in  Scotland  rang  with  the  "  rights  of  conscience," 
and  "  freedom  to  worship  God."  Every  Scotsman  was  a  soldier, 
determined  for  freedom  or  a  grave. 

With  a  formidable  fleet  and  a  powerful  army,  King  Charles 
came  and  looked  on  the  Scots;  and  suddenly  entered  into  a 
negotiation  to  withdraw  his  fleet  and  army,  while  the  Scots  should 
dismiss  their  forces.  Charles  was  insincere  :  but  the  Scots  were 


RISE  OF  THE  CIVIL  WARS.  233 

wary.  They  ordered  every  officer  to  be  ready  at  a  moment's 
warning,  and  every  soldier  to  make  his  account  for  another  in- 
vasion. 

With  great  difficulty  Charles  drew  together  another  army. 
But  his  means  were  exhausted :  his  credit  was  gone.  Thus 
ended  his  experiment  of  an  arbitrary  government  for  twelve 
years.  He  was  forced  to  call  a  Parliament.  The  Parliament 
deemed  it  more  their  duty  to  redress  the  wrongs  of  their  own 
nation,  than  to  furnish  the  king  with  the  means  of  renewing  the 
Episcopal  War. 

The  indomitable  Pym  called  the  attention  of  Parliament  to  the 
wrongs  in  Church  and  State.  Inquiry  was  made  concerning 
persons  illegally  detained  in  prison.  The  Parliament  began  to 
look  into  the  affair  of  ship-money.  The  king,  in  anger,  hastily 
dissolved  the  Parliament.  He  summoned  the  offending  mem- 
bers before  the  council,  and  cast  them  into  prison.  He  borrowed 
money.  He  forced  loans.  Every  dishonorable  and  illegal  method 
was  resorted  to,  to  furnish  means ;  and  being  at  length  prepared, 
he  marched  his  army  once  more  against  the  Scots. 

The  Scots  were  ready,  and  advanced  to  meet  him.  Every 
man  carried  his  week's  provision  of  oatmeal  ;  and  they  took  a 
drove  of  cattle  to  furnish  them  with  meat.  They  had  no  cannon, 
but  a  fertile  invention  supplied  this  deficiency.  "  They  prepared," 
says  Burnet,*  "an  invention  of  guns  of  white  iron,  tinned,  and 
done  about  with  leather,  and  corded  so  that  they  could  serve  for 
two  or  three  discharges."  These  were  light,  and  were  carried  on 
horses.  Thus  furnished,  they  advanced,  they  said,  "To  meet 
their  gracious  Sovereign  ;"  and  with  all  coolness  and  civility,  en- 
treated the  opposing  troops  not  to  stop  them  in  their  way.  When 
these  did  not  comply  with  their  request,  they  attacked  them  with 
an  irresistible  onset.  Those  tinned  guns  saved  the  nation ; 
proved  the  ruin  of  Charles ;  and  perhaps  saved  the  English  lib- 
erties. The  English,  thinking  the  Scots  destitute  of  artillery, 
were  surprised  and  struck  with  a  panic  at  the  first  discharge. 
Their  whole  army  fled.  The  Scots  pressed  on  to  the  collieries ; 
and  by  cutting  off  the  supply  of  fuel,  had  London  at  their  mercy. 
They  advanced  to  Durham;  and  maintaining  the  exactest  disci- 
pline, plundering  nothing,  taking  nothing  without  pay,  they  sent 
messengers  with  redoubled  expressions  of  loyalty  to  their  gracious 
sovereign ;  and  made  apologies  full  of  sorrow  and  contrition  for 
the  necessity  that  had  forced  them  to  achieve  the  victory. 

Thus  ended  the  second  crusade  of  King  Charles  L,  for  forcing 

Episcopacy  and  a  Liturgy  upon  the  Presbyterians  of  Scotland. 

His  resources  were  now  so  exhausted,  that  he  must  either  call  a 

Parliament  or  cease  to  reign.     The  nation,  injured,  indignant, 

*  Burnet's  Hist,  of  His  Own  Times. 


234  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

and  long  groaning  under  every  outrage  upon  the  Constitution  and 
laws,  was  now  to  be  heard.  The  necessities  which  forced  Charles 
to  call  a  Parliament,  forced  him  also  to  give  his  consent  that  they 
should  not  be  dissolved,  save  by  their  own  act.  Thus  began  the 
Long  Parliament  on  the  3d  November,  1640:  the  very  year  when 
the  pioneers  of  the  first  fathers  of  this  town*  began  to  clear  away 
the  unbroken  forests  that  covered  these  shores. 

Never  was  there  a  greater  array  of  talent  and  patriotism  in  an 
English  Parliament.     Even  Lord  Clarendon  admits  that  "  There 
were  many  great  and  worthy  patriots  in  the  house,  and  as  emi- 
nent as  any  age  had  ever  produced."     The  difficult  times ;  the 
long  continued  debates;  the  deep  reflection  upon  the  principles 
of  law,  and  of  popular  rights,  had  awakened  a  mighty  array  of 
talent :  and  the  people,  aware  of  the  crisis,  had  returned  to  Par- 
liament their  ablest  and  best  tried  men.     In  every  crisis  of  the 
kind,  the  times  produce  a  race  of  men  adequate  to  the  emergency. 
It  was  in  those  times,  as  when  the  long  continued  aggressions  of 
Britain  upon  these  colonies,  and  the  long  debates,  and  long  con- 
tinued times  of  peril,  had  brought  into  being  that  race  of  men  • 
who  accomplished  the  American  Revolution  :  a  race  not  less  dis- 
tinguished for  their  intellectual  greatness  than  for  their  pure  de- 
votion to  their  country,  and  for  their  heroism.     Even  Hume  pays 
the  highest  compliment  to  the  distinguished  character  of  the  Long 
Parliament.     "  This  was  the  time,"  he  says,  "  when  genius  and 
capacity  of  all  kinds,  freed  from  the  restraint  of  authority,  and 
nourished   by  unbounded  hopes   and   projects,  began   to  exert 
themselves  and  to  be  distinguished  by  the  public.     There  was 
celebrated  the  sagacity  of  Pym,  more  fitted  for  use  than  orna- 
ment ;  matured,  not  chilled,  by  his  advancing  age  and  long  expe- 
rience."    There   was   Hampden,  "  supported,"  says  Hume,  "  by 
courage,   conducted   by   prudence,   embellished    by   modesty." 
There  wras  Selden,  whose  name  will  ever  be  considered  as  one  of 
the  ornaments  of  English  history.     There  was   Cromwell;  and 
whatever  else  may  be  said  of  him,  this  at  least  will  scarcely  be 
disputed,  that  never  was  the  sceptre  of  England  wielded  by  a 
more  vigorous  or  sagacious  hand.     His  Protectorship,  compared 
with  any  preceding  age,  or  with  several  ages  succeeding,  was  an 
era  of  toleration,  justice,  and  law.     Weakened  as  she  was  by 
the  civil  wars,  England  rose  to  respect  and  greatness  abroad  ; 
and  foreign  tyrants  and  persecutors  trembled  at  Cromwell's  name. 
At  one  word  from  Cromwell,  the  persecutions  against  the  Wal- 
denses   ceased.     The  Duke  of   Savoy  and    Cardinal  Mazarin 
gnashed  their  teeth  with  rage;  but  with  the  whole  power  of  France 
at  command,  they  durst  not  raise  a  finger  more  against  the  Wal- 
denses  while  Cromwell  lived.     "  All  Italy,"  says  Bishop  Burnet, 

*  Nor  walk. 


RISE  OF  THE  CIVIL  WARS.  235 

<f  trembled  at  the  name  of  Cromwell,  and  seemed  under  a  panic 
as  long  as  he  lived.  His  fleet  scoured  the  Mediterranean  ;  and 
the  Turks  "  [who  had  been  the  terror  of  Europe]  "  durst  not  of- 
fend him."  Power,  scenes  of  strife,  and  living  so  long  amid 
plots  and  tumults,  corrupted  his  religious  character ;  so  that  in 
his  latter  days  he  was  not  what  he  once  was ;  but  future  ages 
will  yet  wipe  off  the  stigmas  of  ignorance,  fanaticism,  brutality, 
and  hypocrisy,  that  have  been  so  diligently  cast  upon  the  name 
of  Cromwell.  The  men  of  secondary  rank  in  that  Parliament, 
as  Hetherington  has  well  remarked,  "  were  possessed  of  talents 
and  energy  enough  to  have  earned  a  high  renown  in  any  period 
less  prodigal  of  human  power." 

It  cannot  be  pretended  that  all  their  measures  were  entirely 
moderate  or  wise.  The  times  were  unfavorable.  The  English 
people  were  not,  like  the  American  people  at  their  Revolution, 
prepared  for  a  Republic.  The  past  history  of  the  world  did  not 
hold  out  sufficient  light  to  guide  the  great  experiment.  Causes 
beyond  their  control ;  casualties  to  human  power  inevitable,  hin- 
dered the  results  of  their  labors.  Divine  Providence  overruled. 
But  what  man  may  be  expected  to  do,  they  did.  It  is  not  certain 
that  any  amount  of  human  wisdom  or  energy,  in  their  circum- 
stances, could  have  done  more.  Even  Hume  confesses,  that, 
"  What  rendered  the  power  of  the  Commons  more  formidable, 
was  the  extreme  prudence  with  which  it  was  conducted." 

These  were  now  become  the  vindicators  of  the  laws  and  con- 
stitution against  the  fickle  and  irresolute  King  Charles,  the 
bigoted  and  vindictive  Laud,  and  the  aspiring  Wentworth,  Earl 
of  StrafFord  ;  himself  a  host,  though  on  the  side  of  tyranny.  It 
was  not  to  be  expected  that  such  a  Parliament  would  be  swift  to 
furnish  the  king  with  means  for  carrying  on  the  Episcopal  war  in 
Scotland,  while  those  same  means  might  be  further  employed 
against  their  own  liberties.  They  impeached  the  Earl  of  Strafford 
for  various  overt  acts  aimed  at  subverting  the  fundamental  laws 
of  England.  While  the  bill  of  attainder  was  yet  before  the 
House  of  Lords,  a  conspiracy  was  detected  by  which  the  king 
was  to  bring  the  army,  raised  against  the  Scots,  up  to  London, 
to  overawe  the  Commons,  seize  the  town,  release  the  Earl  of 
Strafford,  place  him  at  the  head  of  the  Irish  Papists,  call  over 
succors  from  France,  and  lay  the  liberties  and  religion  of  the 
people  at  the  feet  of  the  king.* 

An  impeachment  of  high  treason  was  brought  against  Laud. 
The  Lord  Keeper  Finch,  who,  on  the  bench  of  justice,  had  proved 
himself  the  willing  tool  of  the  king  and  council,  and  had  poison- 
ed the  very  laws  in  their  administration,  took  the  alarm  and  fled. 
The  Commons  took  hold  of  those  who  had  been  the  instruments 

*  Neale. 


236  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

of  illegal  exactions.  The  judges  who  had  condemned  Hampden 
in  the  trial  of  ship-money  were  accused  before  the  peers.  The 
sentence  which  had  been  executed  against  Prynne,  Bastwick,  and 
Leighton,  underwent  an  examination.  The  long  captivity  of 
these  injured  men  was  broken.  They  were  brought  from  their 
distant  prisons  in  the  isles  of  Scilly  and  Jersey.  The  people  met 
them  at  their  landing,  with  shouts  of  joy,  and  swelled  the  tide  of 
their  attendants  on  their  triumphant  journey  to  London.  Their 
mutilated  members  could  not  be  restored,  but  redress  was  given 
them  against  those  who  had  pronounced  and  inflicted  the  illegal 
punishment.  The  Parliament  by  a  unanimous  vote  abolished 
the  courts  of  the  Star-Chamber  and  the  High  Commission. 
They  abridged  and  regulated  the  authority  of  the  council.  To 
all  these  things  Charles,  either  through  weakness  or  necessity, 
yielded  his  royal  assent,  though  the  sequel  shows  that  he  did  it 
with  a  hollow  heart,  and  with  the  full  determination  to  regain 
his  despotic  power  as  soon  as  it  could  be  done,  by  flattery,  by 
treachery,  or  by  force. 

As  this  Parliament  abolished  the  system  of  Prelacy  in  Eng- 
lund,  it  is  now  necessary  to  give  some  attention  to  the  causes 
which  more  immediately  led  to  that  event.  It  was  no  pre- 
determination on  the  part  of  the  members  of  that  Parliament. 
"  As  to  their  religion,"  says  Lord  Clarendon,  "  they  were  all 
members  of  the  Established  Church,  and  almost  to  a  man  for 
Episcopal  government."*  Says  another,  "  who  lived  through 
those  times,*'  "  Both  lords  and  commons  were  most,  if  not  all, 
peaceable,  orthodox,  Church  of  England  men  ;  all  conforming  to 
the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  Episcopacy,  but  greatly  averse  to 
popery,  tyranny,  and  to  the  corrupt  part  of  that  Church  that  in- 
clined to  Rome."f 

The  change  of  sentiment  in  this  Parliament,  and  the  change 
in  that  able  body  of  ministers  and  laymen,  who  composed  the 
Assembly  of  Divines,  is  another  instance  of  the  repeated  rise  of 
Puritan  principles,  as  opposed  to  the  Prelatic,  among  men,  by 
education,  by  habit,  and  by  prejudice,  strongly  biased  in  favor  of 
Episcopacy. 

The  circumstances  which  led  to  so  great  a  change  of  senti- 
ment, were  these.  After  the  king  had  so  suddenly  dissolved  the 
last  Parliament,  finding  the  prelates  and  clergy  so  much  in  favor, 
not  only  of  his  "  Episcopal  war,"  but  of  his  claims  to  despotic 
power,  he  gave,  under  the  great  seal,  his  commission  to  the  Con- 
vocation to  reassemble  and  continue  their  sitting.  If  the  Par- 
liament would  not  bind  the  nation  to  slavery  by  law,  the  prelates 
seemed  determined  to  do  it  by  their  canons.  The  Convocation 
proceeded  to  ordain  seventeen  canons  ;  and  first,  concerning  the 

*  Ncale.  t  Moulin  in  Neale. 


RISE  OP  THE  CIVIL  WARS.  237 

regal  power :  "  That  the  most  high  and  sacred  order  of  kings  is 
of  divine  right,  being  the  ordinance  of  God  himself;  *  *  that  for 
subjects  to  bear  arms  against  their  king,  either  offensive  or  defen- 
sive, upon  any  pretence  whatsoever ;  *  *  even  though  they  do  not 
invade,  but  resist,  is  worthy  of  damnation"  This  decree,  every 
parson,  vicar,  curate,  or  preacher,  was  to  read  one  Sunday  in 
every  quarter  of  the  year,  upon  pain  of  suspension  ;  and  if  he 
should  maintain  any  position  contrary  to  it,  he  should  forthwith 
be  suspended  and  excommunicated.  They  added  the  king's 
inauguration  day  to  the  number  of  Holy  Days,  to  be  observed 
by  coming  to  church,  under  the  usual  penalties.  They  de- 
nounced excommunication  upon  all  who  should  print,  import,  or 
disperse,  any  books  written  against  the  discipline  of  the  Church 
of  England.  They  imposed  upon  all  ecclesiastical  persons  an 
oath,  that  they  would  never  give  their  consent  to  alter  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church  by  archbishops,  bishops,  deans,  archdea- 
cons, &c.  Whoever  should  refuse  this  oath  should  be  suspended 
and  deprived.  It  was  to  be  imposed,  likewise,  upon  all  students 
in  the  universities  ;  all  graduates,  lawyers,  divines,  physicians,  and 
schoolmasters. 

Great  were  the  complaints  that  the  clergy  should  presume  to 
define  the  prerogatives  of  the  king,  and  to  impose  upon  the  peo- 
ple the  dogma  of  the  divine  right  of  kings,  of  passive  obedience, 
and  non-resistance.  Great  complaints  were  made  of  this  illegal 
imposition  of  oaths  never  to  consent  to  the  altering  of  a  scheme 
of  Church  government,  parts  of  which  nobody  ever  pretended 
to  be  of  divine  authority,  and  which  were  in  their  nature  change- 
able. 

Great  complaints  were  made  of  compelling  men  to  swear  to 
the  "  &c."  without  denning  what  it, meander  might  be  supposed 
to  mean.  It  was  called  "  The  Et  Cetera  oath"  Numbers  of 
the  clergy  scrupled  to  take  it ;  and  the  murmurings  of  the  people 
were  deep  and  strong. 

The  authority  of  that  illegal  convocation,  and  their  doings, 
fell  under  the  animadversion  of  Parliament.  The  bishops  had 
set  forth  and  attempted  to  impose  principles  touching  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church,  so  mingled  up  with  tenets  destructive  of 
all  liberty,  that  they  provoked  from  that  keen-sighted  Parliament, 
an  examination  which  could  not  well  stop  without  drawing  into 
the  inquiry,  the  claims  of  Episcopacy  itself.  Such  an  inquiry 
had  not  heretofore  been  allowed.  Whoever  ventured  to  write 
against  Episcopacy,  was  sure  to  be  ruined  ;  his  books  were  sup- 
pressed and  destroyed.  A  new  era  had  now  come  :  the  people 
and  the  Parliament  would  have  light. 

Another  circumstance  had  contributed  to  awaken  attention  to 
this  subject.  When  the  king  was  endeavoring  to  force  Episco- 


238  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

pacy  upon  Scotland,  the  Scots  Assembly  had  issued  their 
declaration  affirming  Episcopacy  to  be  unlawful.  To  stop  the 
mischief  of  that  declaration,  Bishop  Hall,  at  the  request  of  Laud, 
composed  a  treatise  on  the  "  Divine  Right  of  Episcopacy"  Di- 
vine right  of  Episcopacy  !  Is  this  so  ?  murmured  many  who 
sympathized  with  the  persecuted  Scots.  The  press  was  now 
open ;  and  a  flood  of  publications  poured  forth  under  titles  like 
these : 

"  Prelatical  Episcopacy,  not  from  the  Apostles!" 

"  Lord  bishops,  not  the  Lord's  Bishops!" 

"  A  comparison  between  the  Liturgy  and  the  Mass-Book  !" 

"  Service  Book  no  better  than  a  mess  of  pottage  !" 

"  Nature  of  Episcopacy  !" 

Archbishop  Laud  was  in  close  keeping  now.  The  Star- 
Chamber  and  the  High  Commission  were  abolished.  It  was  no 
longer  possible  to  slit  men's  noses,  and  to  crop  their  ears,  or  to 
condemn  them  to  perpetual  imprisonment  for  examining  the 
nature  and  claims  of  Episcopacy.  It  was  the  first  time  that 
there  had  been  liberty  of  discussion,  and  a  safe  field.  The  king 
and  the  bishops  had  made  the  issue  under  the  claim  of  a  divine 
right. 

Bishop  Hall  once  more  entered  the  field  with  "  An  Humble  Re- 
monstrance to  the  High  Court  of  Parliament"  and  again  in  "  A 
Defence  of  that  Remonstrance"  He  was  answered  by  the  com- 
bined forces  of  several  writers  under  the  strange  title  of  "  Smec- 
tymnuus ;"  which  word  was  nothing  more  than  the  initials  of 
Stephen  Marshal,  Edmund  Calamy,  Thomas  Young,  Matthew 
Newcomen,  and  William  Spurstow. 

The  debate  filled  the  nation.  Letters  were  written  on  both 
sides,  for  the  views  of  foreign  divines.  Blondel  came  out  in  a 
learned  work  on  the  side  of  the  Puritans.  Amyraldus  for  Epis- 
copacy. Says  Hetherington,  "  Even  the  mighty  Milton  employ- 
ed his  pen  in  this  keen  literary  warfare ;  and  it  is  no  rash  matter 
to  assert,  that  in  learning,  talent,  genius,  and  strength  of  argu- 
ment, the  Puritan  writers  immeasurably  surpassed  their  antago- 
nists, and  produced  an  impression  on  the  public  mind  so  deep 
and  strong,  that  it  decided  the  controversy,  so  far  as  prelatic 
Church  government  was  concerned,  even  at  its  beginning."* 

Petitions  poured  into  Parliament.  One,  of  fifteen  thousand 
citizens  of  London,  called  the  "  Root  and  Branch  Petition  ;"  de- 
siring that  the  whole  fabric  of  the  hierarchy  might  be  destroyed, 
"  Root  and  Branch  :"  another,  signed  by  seven  hundred  beneficed 
clergymen,  and  an  incredible  number  of  hands  from  the  several 
counties  of  England,  praying,  not  for  an  extirpation  of  Episco- 
pacy, but  for  its  reformation.  On  the  other  side,  petitions  were 
•  Hist,  of  Assembly  of  Divines,  p.  72. 


RISE  OF  THE  CIVIL  WARS.  239 

presented  to  the  king  and  the  House  of  Lords,  by  multitudes  of 
the  people,  including  six  thousand  of  the  nobility,  gentry,  and 
dignified  clergy.  These  petitions  imported  that,  without  bishops, 
there  can  be  no  presbyters,  no  consecration  of  the  elements,  no 
Church." 

The  "  Root  and  Branch  "  petition  set  forth  that,  "  Whereas  the 
government,  of  archbishops  and  lord-bishops,  deans  and  arch- 
deacons *  *  *  with  their  courts  and  administrations  in  them, 
have  proved  prejudicial  and  very  dangerous  to  the  Church  and 
commonwealth  :  they  themselves  having  formerly  held  that  they 
have  their  jurisdiction  or  power  of  human  authority ;  till  of  late 
they  have  claimed  their  calling  immediately  from  Christ ;  *  *  * 
And  whereas  the  said  government  is  found,  by  woful  experience, 
to  be  a  main  cause  and  occasion  of  many  foul  evils,  pressures, 
and  grievances  of  a  very  high  nature,  to  all  his  Majesty's  sub- 
jects, in  their  consciences,  liberties,  and  estates,  We  therefore 
humbly  pray  and  beseech  this  honorable  assembly,  the  premises 
being  considered,  that  the  said  government,  with  all  its  dependen- 
cies, roots  and  branches,  may  be  abolished." 

For  several  days  set  apart  for  the  purpose,  these  matters  were 
debated  in  the  Parliament.  Sir  Harry  Vane,  Selden,  and  Lord 
Falkland,  whom  Clarendon  declares  the  most  extraordinary  per- 
son of  his  age,  participated  in  that  debate.  The  most  eminent 
advocates  of  .Episcopacy  agreed  with  Lord  Falkland  when  he 
said,  "  I  do  not  believe  the  order  of  bishops  to  be  of  divine  right, 
nor  do  I  think  them  unlawful"  From  that  moment,  the  Divine 
Right  of  the  order  of  bishops  was  numbered,  by  the  Parliament 
and  by  the  bulk  of  the  nation,  among  the  idle  dreams  and  ex- 
ploded dogmas  of  superstition.  But  neither  the  Parliament  nor 
the  nation  was  ready  to  abolish,  Root  and  Branch,  a  system  which, 
however  arrogant  and  mischievous,  was  yet  interwoven  into  the 
Constitution  as  one  of  its  integral  parts.  They  dreamed  not  yet 
of  abolishing  the  monarchy :  they  hoped  to  settle  the  affairs  of 
the  nation  in  good  understanding  with  the  king ;  but  henceforth 
they  placed  the  Divine  Right  of  bishops  and  the  Divine  Right  of 
kings  on  the  same  grounds,  as  in  their  claims  too  idle,  and  in 
their  tendency  too  clearly  at  war  with  all  freedom,  ever  more  to 
be  entertained. 

I  need  not  detail  the -efforts  of  Parliament  at  amending  the 
Hierarchical  establishment.  That  it  needed  retrenchment  and 
limits,  and  that  great  abuses  needed  to  be  redressed,  all  agreed. 
The  opposition  of  the  king  and  bishops  only  served  to  discover 
more  and  more  the  enormity  of  these  abuses,  and  the  deep  mis- 
chief of  the  prelatical  scheme.  When  at  length  the  Assembly 
of  Divines  was  called,  which  consisted  of  men  all  bred  in  the 


240  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Established  Church,  and  up  to  these  times  all  friends  of  Episco- 
pacy, so  thorough  was  the  conviction  of  the  .groundless  nature  of 
the  Episcopal  claims,  and  of  its  incompatibility  with  the  best  in- 
terests of  freedom  and  religion,  that  there  were  none  to  plead  for 
the  prelatical  scheme.* 

One  or  two  incidents  more  must  be  added  to  the  causes  which 
concurred  to  originate  the  civil  wars ;  and  first,  the  massacre  of 
the  Protestants  of  Ireland.  "  The  British  Protestants  transplanted 
into  Ireland,"  says  Hume,  "  having  every  moment  before  their 
eyes  all  the  horrors  of  Popery,  had  naturally  been  carried  to  the 
opposite  extreme  ;  and  had  universally  adopted  the  highest  prin- 
ciples and  practices  of  the  Puritans.  Monarchy  as  well  as  the 
hierarchy  was  become  odious  to  them  ;  and  every  method  of  lim- 
iting the  authority  of  the  Crown,  and  detaching  themselves  from 
the  King  of  England,  was  greedily  adopted  and  pursued.  For 
the  same  reasons,  the  Irish  Catholics  had  become  the  bitter  foes 
of  the  English  Parliament,  and  the  warm  adherents  of  King 
Charles.  The  queen,  a  zealous  Papist,  had  been  informed  by 
the  heads  of  the  Irish  Papists,  with  what  ease  they  could  seize 
the  control  of  Ireland,  and  aid  the  king  against  the  Puritans. 
Letters  were  written  in  the  queen's  name,  authorizing  them  to 
take  arms  and  seize  the  government."  This  was  all  doubtless 
with  the  king's  concurrence,  though  there  is  a  dispute  whether 
they  had  his  commission.  In  the  first  plotting  of  this  scheme, 
there  was  probably  no  intention  of  the  massacre  which  followed  ; 
that  was  a  subsequent  addition  of  the  Irish  leaders  and  priests. 
From  April  to  October,  the  English  court  knew  of  the  intended 
insurrection ;  but  no  information  reached  the  Protestants  of  Ire- 
land till  the  very  night  before  which  it  was  to  take  place ;  and 
when  the  news  reached  the  Commons  by  an  express,  every  man 

*  An  abler  body  of  divines  was  probably  never  assembled  among  uninspired  men. 
Among  its  lay  members,  were  Selden,  Pym,  and  Sir  Matthew  Hale.  Among  the 
clergy  were  Caryl,  Calamy,  Goodwin,  Lightfoot,  Prideaux,  Reynolds,  Usher,  Ruth- 
erford, Gillespie,  besides  a  multitude  of  others,  whose  names  would  have  been  suf- 
ficient to  distinguish  the  history  of  any  other  age.  The  journal  of  Lightfoot  shows 
with  what  thoroughness,  freedom,  and  deliberation  every  subject  was  discussed ; 
and  with  what  care  and  critical  minuteness  they  resorted  to  the  Word  of  God  as  the 
arbiter  and  end  of  strife.  As  to  the  principles  of  entire  toleration,  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  had  not  wholly  thrown  off  the  shackles  of  ancient  error.  They,  too,  aimed 
at  a  compulsive  uniformity.  But  defective  as  their  establishment  was,  the  nation 
still  preferred  it  to  Episcopacy.  On  this  point  the  testimony  of  Hume  is  unequivocal : 
"  Had  the  jealousy  of  royal  power  prevailed  so  far  with  the  Convention  Parliament, 
as  to  make  them  restore  the  king  with  strict  limitations,  there  is  no  question  but 
the  establishment  of  the  Presbyterian  discipline  had  been  one  of  the  conditions  most  rigidly 
insisted  on.  Not  only  that  form  of  ecclesiastical  government  is  more  favorable  to  liberty 
than  royal  power ;  it  was  likewise,  on  its  own  account,  agreeable  to  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  suited  their  religious  principles.  But  as  the  impatience  of  the  people,  the  danger 
of  delay,  the  general  disgust  with  faction,  and  the  authority  of  Monk,  had  prevailed 
over  the  jealous  project  of  limitations,  the  full  settlement  of  the  hierarchy,  together 
with  the  monarchy,  was  a  necessary  and  infallible  consequence." 


RISE  OF  THE   CIVIL  WARS.  241 

was  struck  dumb  with  astonishment  and  horror.  The  Court  evi- 
dently meant  to  betray  the  Protestants  into  the  hands  of  the  Pa- 
pists. The  castle  of  Dublin  contained  arms  for  10,000  men,  with 
numerous  cannon,  and  immense  military  stores ;  and  yel,  that  it 
might  fall  an  easy  prey,  it  was  left  with  a  guard  of  no  more  than 
fifty  men.  An  Irishman,  the  night  before  the  rising,  betrayed  the 
plot  to  a  friend,  and  this  saved  the  castle,  which  proved  a  shelter 
to  some  Protestants  during  the  storm  that  followed.  The  Irish,  * 
everywhere  mingling  with  the  unsuspecting  English,  at  the  signal 
given,  fell  upon  their  victims.  Not  to  trust  myself  with  a  descrip- 
tion, I  simply  copy  from  the  words  of  Hume :  "  A  universal  mas- 
sacre commenced  of  the  English,  now  defenceless.  No  age,  nor 
sex,  nor  condition  was  spared.  The  wife,  weeping  for  her  butch- 
ered husband,  and  embracing  her  helpless  children,  was  pierced 
with  them  and  perished  by  the  same  stroke.  *  *  *  In  vain 
did  flight  save  from  the  first  assault.  In  vain  was  recourse  had 
to  relations,  to  companions,  to  friends  ;  all  connexions  were  dis- 
solved ;  and  death  was  dealt  by  the  hand  from  which  protection 
was  implored  and  expected."  *»*...«  But  death  was  the 
slightest  punishment  inflicted:  all  the  tortures  which  wanton  cru- 
elty could  devise ;  all  the  lingering  pains  of  body,  the  anguish 
of  mind,  the  agonies  of  despair,  could  not  satiate  revenge  excited 
without  injury,  and  cruelty  from  no  cause.  *  *  The  weaker 
sex  themselves  here  emulated  their  more  robust  companions  in 
the  practice  of  every  cruelty.  Even  children  *  *  *  essayed 
their  feeble  blows  on  the  dead  carcasses  or  defenceless  children  of 
the  English."  *  *  "  From  Ulster,  the  flames  of  rebellion  dif- 
fused themselves  in  an  instant  over  the  other  three  provinces  of 
Ireland.  In  all  places  death  and  slaughter  were  not  uncommon, 
though  the  Irish  in  these  other  provinces  pretended  to  act  with 
moderation  and  humanity.  But  cruel  and  barbarous  was  their 
humanity.  Nof'content  with  expelling  the  English  from  their 
homes ;  with  despoiling  all  their  goodly  manors  ;  with  wasting 
the  cultivated  fields ;  they  stripped  them  of  their  very  clothes,  and 
turned  them  out,  naked  and  defenceless,  to  all  the  severities  of  the 
season.  The  heavens  themselves,  as  if  conspiring  against  that 
unhappy  people,  were  armed  with  cold  and  tempest  unusual  to 
the  climate,  and  executed  what  the  merciless  sword  had  left  un- 
finished. The  roads  were  covered  with  crowds  of  naked  Eng- 
lish, hastening  towards  Dublin  and  other  cities  which  remained 
in  the  hands  of  their  countrymen." 

In  this  massacre,  there  perished  from  one  hundred  and  fifty  to 
two  hundred  thousand.  The  surviving  English  were  blocked 
up  in  their  defences  till  the  "  Parliament  was  at  leisure  to  pour 
out  their  vengeance  upon  the  heads  of  the  murderers  by  the 
hands  of  the  victorious  and  terrible  Oliver  Cromwell." 
16 


S42 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


While  the  Parliament  and  nation  were  under  the  strong  feel- 
ings excited  by  these  transactions,  the  king  entered  an  accusation 
of  High  Treason  against  Lord  Kimbolton,  and  five  Commons, 
Hollis,  Hazelrig,  Hampden,  Pym,  and  Strode.  A  Serjeant  at 
arms  carne  to  the  house,  and  in  the  king's  name  demanded  the 
five  members — but  in  vain.  The  next  day,  the  king  in  person, 
accompanied  by  some  two  hundred  men  with  swords,  came  to 
seize  them,  but  they  had  received  notice,  and  were  fled.  In 
passing  through  the  streets  of  London,  the  next  day,  Charles 
was  everywhere  greeted  with  the  cry  of  "  Privilege"  "  Privilege" 
"Privilege  of  Parliament  !"  A  sturdy  yeoman  drew  near  to  the 
royal  coach  and  shouted  aloud,  "  To  your  Tents,  O Israel!" 

The  die  was  cast.  There  was  no  further  appeal  but  to  arms. 
The  king  collected  his  forces ;  and  at  Nottingham,  on  the  25th 
of  August,  1642,  "  he  erected  his  royal  standard  ;  the  open  sig- 
nal of  civil  war,  throughout  the  kingdom."  Before  another  sun 
arose,  a  dreadful  storm  had  blown  that  standard  down  ;  nor  did 
the  raging  tempest  permit  it  to  be  erected  again  for  two  days. 

It  is  not  rny  design  to  pursue  the  incidents  of  that  war,  in 
which  the  royal  power,  and  the  Hierarchy,  fell  before  the  strength 
of  the  people;  and  in  which  Charles,  with  the  two  ministers  of 
his  tyrannies,  Strafford  and  Laud,  perished  on  the  scaffold.  These 
were  stirring  times;  full  of  incidents,  and  full  of  instruction. 
But.  my  design  is  accomplished  in  having  pursued  that  history 
so  far  as  to  trace  the  events  which  mark  the  history  and  princi- 
ples of  the  Puritans.  We  might  go  on  to  trace  the  renewal  of  the 
old  persecutions  against  the  Puritans  on  the  restoration  of  King 
Charles  II.  We  might  tell  of  the  bloody  massacres  which  he 
inflicted  upon  the  Scots.  We  might  tell  of  the  "  Corporation 
Act"  requiring  all  Magistrates  to  swear  to  the  doctrine  of  pas- 
sive obedience  and  non-resistance ;  of  the  "  Act  of  Uniformity" 
by  which  all  ministers,  heads  of  Colleges,  and  schoolmasters, 
and  every  person  instructing  youth  in  a  private  family,  were  re- 
quired to  declare  tKeir  unfeigned  assent  to  everything  contained 
in  the  Prayer-Book,  and  to  all  the  rites  and  ceremonies  of  the 
established  Church ;  as  well  as  their  full  assent  to  the  doctrine  of 
passive  obedience  and  non-resistance.  We  might  tell  of  St.  Bar- 
tholomew's day,  in  1662,  when  two  thousand  of  the  ablest  and 
best  esteemed  clergymen  were  at  once  turned  out  of  their  liv- 
ings, for  non-conformity. 

We  might  tell  of  the  Five-mile  Act  in  1665,  by  which  all  dis- 
senting ministers  were  forbidden,  except  upon  the  road,  to  come 
within  five  miles  of  any  place  where  they  had  preached  since 
the  act  of  oblivion.  "By  ejecting  the  non-conforming  clergy 
from  their  churches,"  says  Hume,  "  and  prohibiting  all  separate 
congregations,  they  had  been  rendered  incapable  of  any  liveli- 


RISE  OF  THE  CIVIL  WARS.  243 

hood  by  their  spiritual  profession.  And  now,  under  color  of 
removing  them  from  places  where  their  influence  might  be  dan- 
gerous, an  expedient  was  fallen  upon  to  deprive  thenn  of  all 
means  of  subsistence."  Multitudes  of  them  pined  out  their 
years  in  prison.  We  might  go  on  to  tell  of  these  things  in  a 
long  course  of  injuries  which  have  not  wholly  ceased  down  to 
the  present  day.  Even  now,  under  all  the  mitigations  obtained, 
the  wrongs  and  indignities  inflicted  upon  the  non-conformists  of 
England,  are  such  as  Americans  would  find  it  impossible  to  en- 
dure. But  a  detail  of  these  things  would  be  only  a  repetition  of 
the  same  conflict  of  principle,  and  of  the  same  development  of 
the  temper,  principles,  and  tendencies  of  prelacy,  which  we  have 
already  traced  for  a  course  of  more  than  two  hundred  years ;  and 
yet  which  we  have  only  partly  and  inadequately  portrayed. 
This  part  of  my  work,  is,  therefore,  now  done.  We  return  to 
the  principles  and  polity  of  the  Puritan  Churches  ;  and  to  an  ex- 
amination of  the  Prelatical  claims,  as  set  forth  by  those  who  would 
fain  persuade  us  that  we  are  bound  to  abandon  the  principles  of 
our  fathers,  and  to  return  to  the  yoke  which  our  fathers  detested 
as  more  intolerable  than  banishment  or  death. 


XVIIL 


THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OP  FAITH. 

Bishop  of  Connecticut  on  the  Rule  of  Faith.  "  The  Scriptures  as  inter- 
preted by  the  first  two  centuries."  Dr.  Jarvis  extends  it  to  five  centu- 
ries ;  others  to  seven ;  to  nine ;  to  eighteen.  Who  to  fix  the  limit  ? 
Who  to  declare  the  interpretation  ?  Absurdity  of  the  rule.  No  stable 
ground  between  Puritanism  and  Popery.  The  Prayer-Book  as  the 
interpretation  of  an  interpretation.  Impossible  to  fix  the  standard 
of  the  first  two  centuries.  Episcopalians,  on  their  principles, *bound 
to  fix  the  canons  of  the  Fathers,  and  to  give  them  to  the  people. 
Doctrine  of  the  Bishop  of  Connecticut  contrasted  with  the  doctrine  of 
the  Scriptures.  The  Bible  alone  the  religion  of  Protestants. 

THERE  are  two  or  three  preliminary  questions,  involving  funda- 
mental principles,  which  lie  back  of  all  questions  of  Church  or- 
ganization, of  discipline,  and  modes  of  worship.  If,  in  debating 
the  great  question  at  issue  between  Puritanism  and  Prelacy,  we 
make  our  appeal  to  the  Word  of  God,  even  Protestant  Prelacy, 
at  the  present  day,  affirms  that  "  The  Bible  alone,  to  the  exclusion 
of  all  Church  AUTHORITY;  *  *  is  no  sufficient  ground  of  union 
and  stability."*  The  Bishop  of  Connecticut  in  his  recent  charge 
says,  that  "  The  Holy  Scriptures  AS  THEY  WERE  INTERPRETED 
BY  THE  CHURCH  during  the  TWO  FIRST  CENTURIES,  *  * 
constitute  THE  ONLY  SURE  BASIS  to  rest  upon:1  Nor 
does  he  allow  us  to  go  and  search  those  two  first  centuries  for 
ourselves  ;  oh  no  ;  we  must  take  the  Church's  interpretation  of 
that  interpretation,  so  that  our  rule  is  removed  two  steps  back 
from  the  Word  of  God !  "  The  result"  he  says,  "  is  FULLY  em- 
bodied in  our  book  of  Common  Prayer ;  a  STANDARD  of  faith; 
which,  he  says,  "  now  stands  secure,  as  the  only  enduring  monu- 
ment of  the  Protestant  Reformation."  The  Bible  alone  as  a  rule 
of  faith,  and  the  right  of  a  private  man  to  go  to  the  Bible  with- 
out subjecting  his  judgment  to  the  interpretations  or  traditions  of 
the  Church,  he  stigmatizes  as  among  "  The  Errors  of  the  Times" 
"  The  continental  Reformers,"  he  says,  "  wTent  to  the  extreme  of 
rejecting  all  TRADITION  and  CHURCH  AUTHORITY."  He  laments 
the  "  schisms,"  "  heresies,"  "  infidelity,"  "  fanaticism,"  and  "  dis- 

*  Bishop  Brownell,   Charge. 


THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OF  FAITH.  245 

tractions,"  which  have  sprung  from  this  rejection.  "  I  need  not 
tell  you,"  he  says,  "  that  there  are  numerous  bodies  of  intelli- 
gent and  devoted  Christians  ;  but  without  any  sufficient  bond  of 
union  and  stability  ;  the  Bible  alone,  to  the  exclusion  of  all 
Church  authority,  the  Bible  alone,  without  note  or  comment,  their 
only  standard  of  faith  ;  and  the  utmost  liberty  of  private  inter- 
pretation allowed." 

Now  in  opposition  to  these  views,  the  Puritan  principle 
(which,  indeed,  till  recently  we  had  supposed  the  common  prin- 
ciple of  Protestantism)  is,  that  the  Bible  alone  is  the  sole  and 
sufficient  standard  of  faith.  With  regard  to  the  interpretation  of 
that  rule  we  have  ever  held,  that  we  may  search  for  all  the  light 
that  can  be  found  in  Christian  writers,  or  in  profane,  modern  or 
ancient,  but  that  we  need  not — nay,  we  must  not  bind  our  belief 
to  any  interpretation,  whether  of  the  Church  or  of  councils,  doc- 
tors, or  Fathers ;  otherwise  our  faith  stands  not  in  the  Word  of 
God,  but  in  the  opinions  of  men.* 

Let  us  examine  a  little,  the  Prelatic  principles  as  laid  down  by 


*  In  laying  down  his  doctrine,  the  bishop  makes  several  false  issues.  We  do  not 
(as  he  intimates  that  we  do)  refuse  to  investigate  ''any  fact"  pertaining  to  "  re- 
mote antiquity,"  by  the  light  of  "  cotemporary  history."  But  that  is  not  the  ques- 
tion ;  the  point  at  issue  is,  What  at  last  is  the  authoritative  standard  ?  Is  it  the 
Word  of  God  ?  or  must  we  make  a  Bible  of  the  Fathers,  or  rather  of  the  Prayer- 
Book?  Is  the  standard  of  faith  the  Bible  alone  ;  or  the  Bible  as  interpreted  by  the 
two  first  centuries;  or  rather  the  Bible  as  interpreted  by  the  interpretation  of  the 
interpretation  of  those  two  centuries;  the  "results"  of  which  interpretation  of  an 
interpretation,  it  is  claimed  are  now  "  FULLY"  embodied  in  the  "  Prayer-Book  ?" 

With  regard  to  private  judgment  the  bishop  makes  one  or  two  false  issues  more. 
None  of  us  have  ever  contended  that  we  may  "rightfully"  set  up  "our  private 
judgment"  in  opposition  to  the  Word  of  God;  or  that  we  may  "  rightly  exercise"  it 
M  in  a  spirit  of  vanity  or  self-conceit,"  as  though  in  maintaining  the  right  of  private 
judgment,  we  had  maintained  the  right  to  exercise  that  judgment  in  so  reprehensible 
a  mode  and  spirit !  We  claim  a  right  to  go  to  the  Bible  for  ourselves,  without  tradi- 
tion, or  decrees,  or  interpretations  of  bishop,  council,  or  Pope  ;  but  we  claim  no 
right  to  indulge  a  spirit  of  "  vanity,  perversity,  or  self-conceit."  If  the  bishop 
thought  these  inuendos  argument,  he  mistook  the  question.  If  he  threw  them  out 
as  correct  representations  of  matters  of  fact,  he  did  us  injustice. 

Another  position  of  Bishop  Brownell,in  this  connection,  deserves  further  notice 
than  we  can  give  it  here.  We  hold,  that  for  the  conscientious  exercise  of  our 
private  judgment  in  matters  of  faith,  we  are  responsible  only  to  conscience  and  to 
God. 

The  bishop  holds  that  we  are  responsible,  not  only  to  God,  but  in  a  minor  degree 
"£o  our  fellow-men"  He  says  that  "  we  may  not  rightly  exercise  [viz.  our  private 
judgment  in  matters  of  faith],  in  a  way  injurious  to  the  order  and  peace  of  society  •  nor 
without  a  due  veneration  for  the  judgment  of  the  Church  and  its  ministry." — (  Charge,  p.  7.) 
So  thought  Bishop  Bonner;  and  he  did  hold  the  private  conscience  and  judgment 
responsible  to  man.  He  carried  out  the  idea  to  its  legitimate  consequences  The 
Pope  has  ever  thought  that  such  heretics  as  the  Albigenses,  Waldenses,  and  Hugue- 
nots, exercised  their  judgment  "in  a  way  injurious  to  the  peace  and  order  of 
society,"  and  "without  due  veneration  for  the  judgment  of  the  Church;"  and 
doubtless  he  thinks  the  same  of  us,  and  of  the  Bishop  of  Connecticut  too.  But  will 
the  Bishop  of  Connecticut  allow  the  Pope  to  hold  us  "  responsible  ?"  If  so,  TO 
WHOM  are  we  "  responsible  ?"  Who  may  call  u?  to  an  account  for  exercising  our 
private  judgment  in  matters  of  faith,  "  without  due  veneration  for  the  judgment  of 
the  Church  and  its  ministry  ?" 


246  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Bishop  Brownell  ;  that  "  The  Holy  Scriptures,  as  they  were  in- 
terpreted by  the  Church  during  the  two  first  centuries,  *  *  con- 
stitute the  only  sure  basis  to  rest  upon." 

I.  On  what  principle,  or  by  what  authority  does  he  fix  the  limit 
at  the  first  two  centuries  ?  If,  because  those  centuries  were  pure 
and  others  were  not,  then  does  he  set  his  private  judgment  above 
his  standard  ;  JUDGING  THOSE  CENTURIES  whether  they  were  pure. 
And  by  what  RULE  does  he  judge  them?  By  the  Bible  ?  But 
he  cannot  interpret  the  Bible  till  he  has  first  fixed  its  meaning  on 
the  authorities  of  those  two  centuries,  i.  e.,  till  he  has  first  proved 
his  standard  by  the  thing  which  it  is  to  measure  !  He,  therefore, 
has  no  ultimate  standard,  unless  he  will  either  set  up  his  private 
judgment  as  infallible,  or  consent  to  repose  in  the  supreme  infal- 
libility of  the  Church,  or  of  the  Pope. 

Thus  he  lays  the  foundation  of  his  scheme  in  an  ineffable 
absurdity,  and  imposes  upon  himself  the  necessity  of  rearing  its 
superstructure  in  mazes  and  self-contradictions  without  end. 

But  in  fixing  the  limit  at  two  centuries,  the  bishop  has  an  ac- 
count to  settle  with  his  more  learned  presbyter.  Dr.  Jarvis  ex- 
tends the  limit  three  hundred  years  further.*  The  bishop  in  his 
charge  considers  the  Prayer-Book  as  a  fixed  and  certain  standard  ; 
not  to  be  varied  and  invariable.  Dr.  Jarvis  boldly  avows  f  that 
neither  is  the  Episcopal  Church  established  in  its  "  ancient  cus- 
toms and  privileges,"  nor  in  "  the  doctrines  of  the  Scriptures 
according  to  the  consentient  interpretation  of  Catholic  antiquity  ;" 
nor  in  "  government,  discipline,  and  ritual  :"  that  "  The  inten- 
tion of  the  reformers  was  hindered  from  being  fully  carried  out  by 
opposition,  first  of  the  Papists,  and  afterwards  of  the  Puritans  ;" 
and  that  "  IT  REMAINS  for  us  [the  Episcopal  Church]  with  tran- 
quillity and  patience  to  PURSUE  the  great  and  true  principles  of 
the  English  Reformation;"  which,  he  says,  "are  reducible  to 
three  heads  :  1st.  To  recover  the  original  customs  and  privileges 
of  the  British  Church.  2d.  To  restore  the  doctrines,  &c.  3d. 
To  bring  back  the  government,  discipline,  and  ritual,  to  the 
general  analogy  of  practice  at  the  time  of  the  fourth  general 


turies  will  not  do.  The  standard  of  faith,  ritual,  and  discipline, 
is  not  fixed  in  the  Prayer-Book,  as  the  bishop  fondly  thought  ; 
but  as  his  learned  presbyter  assures  us,  Prayer-Book,  ritual,  and 
doctrine  are  all  yet  out  of  their  longitude  by  three  hundred  years, 
and  that  a  work  of  '•'•restoring,  recovering,  and  bringing  back," 
yet  "  remains"  to  be  "  pursued  "  with  "  tranquillity  and  patience." 
The  Episcopal  Church  is,  therefore,  yet  afloat,  and  whither  it 
will  yet  drift,  can  any  mortal  tell,  unless  we  may  conjecture  by 

*  "  Address  to  Members  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  ;  or.  No  Union  with 
Rome,  dated  '  Festival  of  St.  Bartholomew,  1843.'  "  f  Ibid. 


THE  RULE  AND   JUDGE    OF    FAITH.  247 

the  drift  of  the  current,  which  is  now  so  strongly  and  manifestly 
setting  toward  Rome  ? 

"Quern  das  finem,  rex  magne,  laborum?"  How  determine 
where  to  rest  ?  How  shall  they  decide  where  to  fix  the  land- 
mark ?  It  is  not  in  the  Bible  alone.  It  is  not  in  the  Prayer- 
Book.  It  is  not  in  the  first  two  centuries.  Some  say,  with  Dr. 
Jarvis,  it  is  in  the  middle  of  the  Fifth.  Some  say  it  is  at  the  end 
of  the  Sixth  General  Council,  or  at  the  end  of  seven  centuries. 
Others  place  it  at  the  point  of  division  between  the  Eastern  and 
Western  Churches ;  which  point,  again,  some  assign,  to  the 
seventh  century,  others  to  the  ninth.  Others  still,  like  Bishop 
Doane,  Mr.  Newman,  and  Dr.  Pusey,  declare  that  it  embraces  the 
whole  eighteen  centuries. — "  The  Holy  Scriptures,  as  Catholic 
antiquity  has  revealed,  and  as  Catholic  consent  has  kept  their 
meaning.1'* 

But  suppose  the  limits  finally  established,  whether  it  be  at 
two,  seven,  or  nine,  or  eighteen  centuries ;  then, 

II.  Who  is  to  declare,  or  interpret  the  interpretations  of  those 
two,  five,  seven,  or  nine,  or  eighteen  centuries?  Private  judg- 
ment, surely,  will  find  it  more  difficult  to  interpret  those  interpre- 
tations than  the  Word  of  God.  Or  if  the  Church  is  the  authori- 
tative interpreter,  then  who  is  to  declare  the  interpretation  of  the 
Church  ?  Is  it  the  Pope  ?  Councils  ?  Each  individual  bishop  ? 
The  bishops  of  each  province  or  country — so  that  what  is  the  true 
interpretation  of  Catholic  antiquity  in  France,  Spain,  Austria, 
and  Italy,  shall  be  a  false  interpretation  of  the  same  in  these 
United  States  ?  Or  if  the  power  of  interpreting  resides  in  no 
particular  Pope,  or  council,  or  bishop,  and  in  no  house  of  bish- 
ops, but  in  Catholic  consent, — who  has  that  consent?  Bishop 
Brownell,  in  his  Charge,  says  that  the  creed  of  his  Church  ex- 
presses its  belief  in  "  One  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,"  and 
declares  that  the  expression  imports  that  there  is  "  but  one  Church" 
He  talks  about  an  "  Identity "  with  this  Church.  He  distinctly 
recognizes  the  Roman  Church  as  a  part  of  that  one  Catholic 
Church.  If,  therefore,  .the  Protestant  Episcopal  and  the  Roman 
Churches  are  equally  constituent  parts  of  that  one  Catholic 
Church,  which  party  may  be  presumed  to  have  the  "  Catholic 
consent "  that  constitutes  the  authoritative  interpretation  of  the 
interpretation  of  the  two  centuries  ?  Does  that  consent  and  that 
right  lie  with  the  twenty-one  bishops,  or  with  the  twenty-one 
hundred  ?  Does  it  lie  with  the  little  party  in  England  and  the 
United  States,  setting  up  their  interpretation  for  three  hundred 
years :  or  does  it  lie  with  the  great  party  in  Italy,  Austria,  Ire- 
land, France,  Spain,  and  Portugal,  who  not  only  symbolize  with 
the  great  Eastern  Churches  in  the  points  on  which  these  differ 

*  Cited  in  New  Englander,  Jan.,  1844,  p.  70. 


248  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

from  the  Protestant  Episcopalians  in  England  and  the  United 
States,  but  who  hold  the  doctrines  which  confessedly  prevailed 
over  Europe  for  a  thousand  years  before  the  Reformation  ?  On 
Bishop  Brcwnell's  own  principles,  I  do  not  see  why  he  is  not 
bound  to  renounce  all'  Protestantism  as  a  wicked  schism  and 
heresy,  and  to  hasten  back,  as  fast  as  he  can,  to  Rome. 

There  is  still  another  question :  How  many  of  these  twenty- 
one*  American  bishops  are  entitled  to  a  seat  in  the  conclave,  which 
might  be  supposed  to  sit  in  determining  the  American  interpreta- 
tion of  the  first  two  centuries,  even  if  such  an  interpretation  might 
be  supposed  to  determine  the  Catholic  consent ;  and  it  is  a  diffi- 
culty which  those  who  depend  upon  the  valid  sacraments  of  a 
ministry  of  the  true  Apostolical  succession,  would  do  well  to  ex- 
amine, lest  they  should  find  themselves,  after  all,  baptized,  con- 
firmed, and  fed  by  hands  without  any  valid  authority  or  efficiency. 
It  is  this :  It  is  the  undoubted  doctrine  of  all  prelatists,  that  there 
can  be  but  one  bishop  having-  authority  in  the  same  territorial  diocese 
at  the  same  time.-f  Now,  Popish  bishops  are  regarded  by  our  Pro- 
testant Episcopalians  as  true  bishops  ;  and  when  a  presbyter  or- 
dained by  them  enters  the  Episcopal  Church,  according  to  canon, 
and  in  actual  practice,  he  is  not  re-ordained.  But  on  the  6th  of 
October,  1789,  Pope  Pius  VII.  erected  the  United  States  into  a 
bishopric,  and  appointed  "  John  Carroll,  an  ancient  Jesuit  "  (as  the 
record  says),  its  bishop.  At  this  time  there  was  a  Protestant 
Bishop  in  Connecticut,  another  in  New  York,  and  another  in 
Pennsylvania;  but  the  rest  of  the  ground  had  no  bishop.  On  the 
principles  of  Episcopacy,  it  was  all  missionary,  or  heathen 
ground.  In  a  National  Convention  for  determining  the  "  Catholic 
assent,"  save  in  these  three  States,  the  Protestant  Bishops  must  be 
regarded  as  mere  usurpers.  Is  this  doubted  ?  Hear,  then,  au- 
thority, which  those  concerned  are  not.  allowed  to  doubt.  Cyprian 
declares  it  "  contrary  to  law,  for  two  bishops  to  preside  together  in 
the  same  city."  This  also  was  determined  on  by  the  Council  of  Nice, 
and  became  a  settled  proverb,  "  One  God,  one  Christ,  one  Bishop," 
two  bishops  being,  as  Theodoret  testifies,  infamous.  So  that 
whoever  is  made  a  bishop  in  any  given  territory  after  the  first,  is  not 
a  second  bishop,  but  no  bishop  at  all.  Let  those  who  have  passed 
under  the  hands  of  the  Protestant  bishops  in  the  vast  majority  of 
these  United  States,  take  care.  What  right  has  Bishop  Whitting- 
ham  in  Maryland,where  there  was  even  a  popish  archbishop  before 
him  ? J  What  right  has  Bishop  Kemper  in  Missouri  ?  or  McCos- 
kry  in  Michigan  ?  or  Smith  in  Kentucky  ?  or  Polk  in  Louisiana  ? 

*  A.  D.  1843. 

t  See  Chapin's  Primitive  Church,  dedicated  to  Bp.  Brownell. 
\  It  is  not  for  those  to  gainsay  this  appointing  of  a  bishop  to  foreign  unoccupied 
territory,  who  have  so  recently  made  a  bishop  for  Texas. 


THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OF  FAITH.  249 

or  Chase  in  Illinois  ?  Over  these  fields  the  Roman  bishops  had 
already  extended  their  jurisdiction.  The  Popish  title  is,  therefore, 
on  the  prelatical  principle,  indefeasible  in  these  dioceses ;  and  all 
the  doings  of  the  Protestant  prelates,  absolutely  void  and  null ; 
and  their  voices  can  weigh  nothing  in  the  supposed  convention 
for  determining  the  Catholic  consent. 

Now  I  do  maintain,  in  all  soberness,  that  if  we  are  to  depend 
upon  Church  authority  to  interpret  the  interpretations  of  the  first 
two  centuries,  we  can,  with  no  manner  of  consistency  or  reason, 
stop  with  Protestant  Episcopacy.  We  cannot  linger  on  the  road 
with  Bishops  Whittingham  and  Doane,  and  the  Tractarians. 
We  shall  not  palter  with  Romish  principles,  and  still  call  our- 
selves Protestant,  like  the  Bishop  of  Connecticut.  We  must  go 
directly  to  Rome,  whither  these  principles  inevitably  tend. 

Waiving  all  these  difficulties,  however,  and  supposing  the 
Prayer-Book  of  two  countries,  and  of  three  hundred  years — and 
not  the  Mass-Books  of  many  countries,  for  a  thousand  years — to 
be  the  authoritative  interpretation  of  the  interpretation  of  the  first 
two  centuries, — then, 

III.  Even  that  standard,  the  Prayer- Book,  has  proved  no  ground 
of  quietness  and  repose,  but  is  even  now  the  ground  of  turmoil  and 
of  war.  While  all  parties  praise  it,  the  system  of  doctrines  which 
the  Evangelical  and  the  Puseyistic  parties  draw  from  that  stand- 
ard, are  fundamentally  and  irreconcileably  opposed.  Several  of 
the  bishops  have  denounced  the  latter  scheme  as  "  another  Gos- 
pel ;"  while  several  others  as  openly  avow  and  as  strenuously  de- 
fend it*  Nothing  is  more  notorious  than  that  the  body  of  the  clergy 
and  people  of  the  Episcopal  Church  no  longer  hold,  but  utterly 
reject  some  of  the  doctrines  unequivocally  set  forth  in  the  Thirty- 
Nine  Articles.  Thus  the  Seventeenth  Article  clearly  teaches 
the  final  perseverance  of  all  the  elect:  and  so  it  was  authorita- 
tively interpreted  in  the  Fifth  of  the  celebrated  Lambeth  Articles  : 
"  The  true,  lively,  and  justifying  faith,  and  the  Spirit  of  God, 
doth  not  utterly  fail,  doth  not  vanish  away  in  the  elect,  either  finally 
or  totally"  Such  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  :  yet  the  Bishop 
of  Connecticut  says,  in  his  Charge  (p.  22),  "  The  idea  of  a  per- 
severance in  grace  is  popularly  connected  with  a  change  of  heart; 
and  it  is  hence  inferred,  that  if  a  person  is  regenerated  in  baptism, 
his  salvation  is  secured  :  but  the  Church  holds  no  such  doctrine/' 
"  But  the  grace  vouchsafed  in  baptism  may  be  misim- 
proved  and  lost."  King  James  not  only  sent  the  Lambeth  Arti- 
cles to  the  Synod  of  Dort,  as  the  authoritative  interpretation  of 
the  Church  of  England,  but  he  declared  one  who  held  to  the 

*  See  "The  Churchman,"  and  "Protestant  Churchman."  See  also  Bishop 
Mcllvaine's  elaborate  and  admirable  exposure  of  the  Popery  of  Puseyism;  see  also 
the  testimony  of  Dr.  Milnor,  and  of  the  Bishop  of  Calcutta. 


250  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

notion  of  falling  from  grace*  to  be  "  worthy  of  the  fire"  Dr.  Wain- 
wright,  in  his  recent  letters,  earnestly  denounces  the  dogmas  of 
election  and  reprobation  ;  and  declares  the  Episcopal  doctrine  to 
be,  "  The  system  of  free  grace  and  of  salvation  within  the  reach  of 
all :"  "  The  gates  are  continually  open  to  every  man,"  *  "  to 
which  no  man  is  admitted,  and  from  which  no  man  is  excluded,  by 
any  unconditional  decree  of  the  Almighty"  Would  any  man  ima- 
gine that  Dr.  Wainwrighl  belonged  to  that  Church,  which  puts 
forth  as  fundamental  in  its  scheme  of  faith,  these  words  of  the 
Tenth  Article  :  "  The  condition  of  man  after  the  fall  of  Adam,  is 
such,  that  he  cannot  turn  and  prepare  himself  by  his  own  natural 
strength  and  good  works,  to  faith  and  calling  upon  God  ;  where- 
fore we  have  no  power  to  do  good  works  pleasant  and  acceptable 
to  God."  Would  any  one  dream  that  Dr.  Wainwright  belonged 
to  that  Church,  which  so  absolutely  sets  forth  the  doctrine  of  ab- 
solute predestination  in  its  seventeenth  Article ;  and  which  declares 
that  doctrine  to  be  full  of  sweet  and  pleasant,  and  unspeakable 
comfort  to  godly  persons  ?"  Dr.  Wainwright's  private  judgment 
will  not  do  here ;  nor  must  Bishop  Brown  ell  trust  his  own.  The 
Church  authoritatively  interpreted  these  Articles,  by  the  Articles 
of  Lambeth ;  in  which  she  declares,  that  "  God  hath  from  Eter- 
nity predestinated  certain  persons  to  life ;  and  reprobated  certain 
persons  to  death."  This  predestination  and  reprobation,  the  Ar- 
ticles make  absolute,  unconditional,  and  utterly  irreversible. 

Now  all  this  war  of  Puseyism  and  Evangelism — this  discor- 
dant interpretation  of  the  same  standard  in  different  ages,  comes 
most  naturally  from  the  setting  up  of  human  standards  as  a  safer 
authority  than  the  Word  of  God.  If  the  Bible  needs  interpret- 
ing, much  more  does  the  Prayer-Book  need  interpreting.  If  the 
first,  though  the  perfect  Word  of  God,  affords  grounds  for  differ- 
ence in  the  interpretation,  how  much  more  must  differences  arise 
in  interpreting  an  extended  work  of  poor  ignorant  and  erring 
man  ?  Thus,  while  that  Church  boasts  of  her  stability  as  pos- 
sessed of  a  standard  so  much  safer  than  the  Word  of  God,  she 
becomes  like  him  of  old,  of  whom  it  was  said,  "  Unstable  as 
water,  he  shall  not  excel."  Nor  is  it  possible  to  fix  this  floating 
and  Protean  standard  on  the  principle  of  authoritative  interpreta- 
tion. Suppose  the  next  General  Convention  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  possessed  of  entire  authority,  to  give  a  decision 
between  the  conflicting  interpretations  of  Evangelism  and  Pu- 
seyism ;  suppose  their  results  should  be,  no  commingled  and 
equivocal  compromise  between  the  two  parties,  as  it  is  to  be 
expected,*  but  a  plain,  straightforward  document,  intending 
finally  to  settle  the  meaning  of  the  Standards :  if  that  decision 
shall  sustain  the  Puseyistic  views,  will  the  Bishops  of  Vermont 

*  The  General  Convention  has  met,  and  this  expectation  has  been  fulfilled 


THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OF  FAITH.  251 

and  Ohio  conclude  to  receive  that  as  the  true  Gospel  which  they 
have  so  earnestly  and  solemnly  declared  another  Gospel  ?  Or 
should  their  views  prevail,  will  Bishops  Doane  and  Whittingham 
surrender  to- that,  the  faith  for  which  they  have  so  strenuously 
contended  as  the  doctrine  of  ancient  Catholic  consent?  But 
suppose  the  General  Convention  to  agree  in  a  definitive  inter- 
pretation :  Who  is  to  interpret  the  General  Convention  ?  Here 
is  a  circuitous  way  of  coming  at  the  standard  of  faith  :  God  has 
given  his  pure  and  perfect  Word,  by  which  all  things  are  to  be 
measured,  and  which  is  to  be  measured  by  none.  "  Jf  any  man 
shall  add  unto  these  things,  God  shall  add  unto  him  the  plagues 
that  are  written  in  this  Book."  Is  that  book,  then,  the  ultimate 
standard?  Is  the  Bible  alone,  without  note  or  comment,  a 
"  sufficient  bond  of  union  and  stability  ?"  O  no !  We  are  told 
that  we  must  "  add  unto"  it  the  interpretation  of  the  "first  two 
centuries  !"  Unfortunately,  at  the  Reformation,  there  is  a  differ- 
ence of  opinion  as  to  the  interpretation  of  the  first  two  centuries ; 
and  the  bishops  of  a  little  province  set  up  their  interpretations 
against  the  bishops  of  the  Catholic  World,  and  against  the 
"  Catholic  consent "  for  a  thousand  years  !  To  what  do  they  ap- 
peal ?  To  the  Bible  alone  ?  Do  they  then  allow  the  right  of 
private  judgment  ?  Alas !  the  Continental  Reformers,  says 
Bishop  Brownell,  "  went  to  that  extreme  of  rejecting  all  tradi- 
tion and  Church  authority"  (and  so  did  the  British  Reformers 
too):  but  now  he  will  have  it  that  the  Bible  alone  is  no  sufficient 
standard,  nor  must  private  judgment  set  itself  up  against  the 
judgments  of  the  Church.  Is  the  little  handful  of  Protestant 
bishops,  for  this  purpose,  the  Church?  But  suppose  they  are  ; — 
they  fundamentally  disagree.  Who  is  to  interpret  them  ?  Oh, 
the  General  Convention!  Who  now  is  to  interpret  the  General 
Convention  ?  Where,  on  this  principle,  is  the  ground,  on  which 
—to  adopt  the  language  of  Bishop  Brownell — "  wearied  with 
perpetual  agitation  and  changes,"  we  may  "  find  rest  and  repose  ?" 
Instead  of  repose,  another  element  of  discord  is  thrown  into  the 
hurly-burly,  by  interposing  still  another  interpretation  of  an  in- 
terpretation, which  was  originally  but  an  interpretation  of  an  in- 
terpretation, of  the  interpretation  which  the  first  two  centuries 
gave  of  the  Word  of  God  !  The  difficulties  are  multiplied  in 
the  duplicate  ratio  of  the  number  of  removes  from  the  original 
standard ;  and  by  what  shall  we  adjust  them  now  ?  By  the 
Bible  ?  What,  by  the  Bible  alone /  and  by  private  judgment, 
without  reference  to  tradition,  or  the  authority  of  the  Church  ? 
O  no — this  is  the  Puritan  ground,  which  the  bishop  so  earnestly 
rejects.  He  must  take  his  choice,  then,  of  the  only  two  alterna- 
tives that  remain  :  these  difficulties  are  to  be  settled  either  by  the 
infallibility  of  the  Pope ;  or  they  are  to  abide  the  decision  of 


252  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES, 

some  future  interpretation,  which  yet  depends  upon  one  more 
remotely  future,  and  that  remote  future  upon  another  future ; 
and  so  on,  till  the  Day  of  Doom.  If  we  take  neither  of  these 
last  alternatives,  then  we  are  driven  conclusively  to  private  judg- 
ment: and  then,  if  we  take  not  the  Bible  alone  as  the  sole  and 
sufficient  standard,  we  must  chase  the  shadow  of  the  shadow 
of  an  ignis  fatuus,  and  follow  it  whithersoever  it  may  chance  to 
fly,  through  swamps  and  quagmires,  with  no  possibility  of  being 
able  to  plant  our  feet  at  last  upon  solid  ground.  THERE  is  NO 

POSSIBLE    GROUND    TO    REST    UPON     HERE,     BETWEEN     PURITANISM 

AND  POPERY.  Dr.  Jarvis,  indeed,  sets  forth*  as  a  "glorious  ob- 
ject of  an  American  Christian's  contemplation,  "  A  GREAT  AME- 
RICAN CATHOLIC  CHURCH,  equally  removed  from  the  extremes 
of  Popery  and  Protestantism"  fie  has  a  very  pleasing  argu- 
ment to  show  that  "if  ever  the  broken  parts  of  Christ's  body 
come  together"  it  must  be  "  not  upon  the  extremes,  but  in  the 
middle."  He  will  find  it  a  hard  matter,  however,  when  he  has 
leaped  from  the  brink  of  Niagara,  to  stop  half-way  down.  The 
experiment,  as  well  as  the  philosophy  of  the  thing,  in  the  other 
case  shows,  that  HE  WHO  ONCE  ABANDONS  HIS  FOOTING  ON  THE 
ROCK  OF  GOD,  MUST  EXPECT  TO  GO  TO  THE  BOTTOM.  Bishop 
Brownell,  in  his  charge,  speaks  of  "  repose  and  stability  "  in  the 
Episcopal  "  Standards  of  Faith  "  and  "  primitive  forms  of  wor- 
ship." Repose  ?  Here  is  no  possibility  of  repose  !  Here  is  no 
bottom ;  no  shore :  but 

"  A  dark 
Illimitable  ocean  without  bound :" 

"  Chaos  umpire  sits, 
And  by  decision  more  embroils  the  fray 
By  which  he  reigns  ;  next  him,  high  arbiter 
CHANCE  governs  all." 

Those  who  have  fled  to  Church  traditions  and  interpretations, 
and  to  Church  authority,  hoping  to  find  repose  in  these,  rather 
than  on  the  basis  of  God's  Word  alone,  have  already  begun  to 
discover  that  it  is  time  to  remove  once  more  to  the  bosom  of  an 
older  mother.  There  is  no  rest  to  such  lovers  of  repose,  save  in 
the  infallibility  of  Rome.-)1 

*  Address  to  members  of  Prot.  Epis.  Church. 

t  Mr.  Newman  began  on  this  point  with  affirming  antiquity  to  be  a  much  more 
stable  and  inflexible  guide  than  the  Word  of  God.  "  A  private  Christian,"  said  he, 
"may  put  what  meaning  he  pleases  upon  parts  of  SCRIPTURE,  and  none  can  hinder  him." 
*  *  *  "  But  we  cannot  so  deal  with  ANTIQUITY.  Antiquity  does  not  allow  scope 
for  the  off-hand  or  capricious  decisions  of  private  judgment."  [Mr.  Newman  has  (two 
years  since  the  above  was  written)  taken  refuge  in  the  infallibility  of  Rome.  If  the 
Bishop  of  Connecticut  does  not  go  there  too,  it  will  be  because  he  follows  neither 
his  principle  nor  the  logic  by  which  he  sustains  it.]  But  it  was  not  long  ere  a 
brother  Tractarian  discovered  that  it  was  as  hard  to  interpret  antiquity,  as  to  inter- 
pret the  Bible.  "  Is  not  private  judgment"  said  he, lt  as  apt  to  mislead  in  the  interpre- 
tation of  antiquity,  as  in  that  of  Scripture  ?"  He  comes  to  the  conclusion  that,  after 


THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OF  FAITH.  253 

IV.    It  is  impossible  to  fix  the  standards   of  the  first  two 
centuries. 

The  Bible  is  complete :  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and  by 
his  signal  providence  preserved.  Its  canon  is  fixed  and  unalter- 
able. The  Prayer-Book,  it  is  true,  yet  orders  parts  of  the  Apo- 
crypha to  be  read  on  certain  saints'  days  :  but  Protestants  appear 
now  to  be  agreed  that  the  Apocrypha  is  no  part  of  the  Word  of 
God.  The  canon  of  the  Bible  is  therefore  fixed ;  but  no  research 
has  been  able  wholly  to  separate  the  spurious  writings  attributed 
to  the  Fathers,  from  the  true.  Whole  epistles  and  treatises  have 
been  forged :  alterations  and  interpolations  have  been  made,  for 
the  purpose  of  favoring  the  corruptions  of  Rome.  There  was 
opportunity  to  do  this ;  these  writings,  never  having  been  re- 
ceived as  the  Word  of  God,  were  never  extensively  translated 
and  spread  abroad.  For  ages,  many  of  them  were  laid  aside, 
time  out  of  mind ;  and,  from  time  to  time,  dug  out  of  the  dust, 
and  brought  to  light.  It  is  not  two  centuries  since  one  of  the 
oldest  of  them  all,  that  of  Clemens  Romanus,  was  dug  from  the 
dust,  after  having  been  lost  and  unknown  for  a  thousand  years. 
That  oblivion  was  its  protection  from  the  mutilations,  the  changes, 
and  interpolations,  which  were  inextricably  mingled  up  with  such 
works  as  monks  and  priests  were  able  to  lay  their  hands  upon. 
As  different  works  attributed  to  the  Fathers  were  brought  to  light, 

all,  THE  JUDGMENT  OF  THE  CHURCH  (not  the  Bible,  nor  antiquity)  is  to  be  the  rule 
of  faith.  "  We  have  in  no  ivay  maintained,^  says  he,  "  that  an  ordinary  religious  inquirer 
would  have  any  chance  of  discovering  for  himself  the  truth,  by  his  personal  study  of  the 
Fathers."  Here  we  have  it:  Popery  at  full  length;  the  result  wrapped  up  in  the 
principle  of  Bishop  Brownell ;  though  he  seems  not  to  be  aware  of  it;  and  would 
doubtless,  at  this  stage  of  his  progress,  be  frightened  by  a  full  view  of  this  awful 
progeny  of  his  own  principles.  But  the  Oxford  Tractarian — more  far-seeing,  or 
more  consistent — manfully  embraces  the  conclusion.  "  We  have  no  hesitation," 
says  he,  "  in  speaking  of  resorting  to  Church  history  in  the  manner  we  do,  as  the 
result  of  our  degraded  position.  In  the  time  of  Augustine,  or  St.  Thomas  Aquinas, 
it  would  be  a  matter  of  conscientious  inquiry  whether  they  should  follow  the 
Church's  instructions,  as  in  our  days,  with  infants,  whether  they  shall  believe  what 
their  parents  teach  them."  Here  we  have  it  in  full.  The  Bible  is  no  safe  standard : 
private  judgment  is  not  to  be  trusted  with  the  Fathers;  we  must  FOLLOW  THE 
CHURCH'S  INSTRUCTIONS:  away  with  the  Bible;  away  with  the  Fathers;  away 
with  private  judgment:  give  us  sprigs  of  living  infallibity  ;  and  as  these  will 
make  a  Babel  of  their  diverse  interpretations,  let  us  have  that  infallibility  concen- 
trated and  made  of  one  speech  in  a  POPE. 

"  It  is  a  hopeful  sign,"  says  Goode,  "  that  we  have  at  last  got  to  the  second  stage 
of  the  controversy,  when  our  opponents  are  quitting  the  Fathers,  and  making  the  best 
of  their  way,  in  various  directions,  AFTER  THE  CHURCH."  *  *  *  "And  the  next 
question  will  no  doubt  be :  How  are  we  to  get  introduced  to  the  Church  ?  Whether 
by  the  Pope  himself;  or  whether  the  good  offices  of  any  individual  priest  will  do  ? 
And  if  by  the  Pope,  whether  by  the  Pope  in  the  chair,  or  whether  the  Pope  out 
of  the  chair,  will  do  1  or  whether  it  must  be  a  Pope  and  General  Council  ?  &c  ,  &c." 
"  The  contest  is  between  Reformation  Truth  and  Reformation  Principles  on  the  one  hand, 
and  Romish  Principles  and  Romish  Truth  on  the  other.'" 

On  the  system  of  Bishop  Brownell,  the  Church  is  made  a  co-ordinate  authority 
with  God  ;  her  interpretations  are  a  rule,  not  simplv  co-ordinate  with  the  Word  of 
Jehovah,  but  a  rule  paramount  to  that  Word  :  since  her  interpretations  fix  and  govern 
its  meaning.  The  system  is  Church-anity  rather  than  Christianity  ;  and  its  advocates 
very  appropriately  and  consistently  prefer  the  style  of  Church-men  to  that  of  Christian. 


254  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  corruptions  were  gradually  detected.  False  dates,  allusions 
to  events  of  later  years,  words  and  phrases  unknown  to  the  Fath- 
ers, and  indicative  of  a  later  age,  detected  many  entire  forgeries, 
which,  after  having  been  relied  upon  for  centuries,  were  at  length 
given  up  by  the  entire  Christian  world.  In  most  that  remain, 
we  have  not  the  originals ;  but  only  fragments,  quoted  in  writers 
of  a  later  date.  To  this  day,  the  genuine  writings,  and  the  gen- 
uine readings  of  those  supposed  in  the  main  to  be  genuine,  are 
unsettled  :  learned  men  of  all  communions  still  holding  them  in 
debate. 

Besides  this,  the  early  Fathers,  in  their  writings,  which  are 
allowed  to  be  genuine,  betray  gross  unsoundness,  erring  and  mis- 
taking in  many  of  the  clearest  and  most  indubitable  principles  of 
the  Word  of  God.  Crudities,  errors  of  judgment  and  of  igno- 
rance, fables,  a  mingling  of  Christianity  with  the  various  fond 
tenets  of  the  philosophy  prevalent  in  their  respective  countries 
and  ages,  have  greatly  marred  their  expositions  of  divine  truth. 
They  conflicted  with  each  other.  Origen,  the  most  learned  of  the 
ancient  Fathers,  adopted  principles  of  interpretation  which  all  de- 
nominations in  the  world  reprobate  at  the  present  day.  He 
actually  mutilated  his  own  body,  because  the  Saviour  had  said, 
"  Some  have  made  themselves  eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  Hea- 
ven's sake."  It.  seems  as  though  Christ  had  intended,  not  only  to 
ivarn  us  against  reliance  upon  the  Fathers,  by  charging  us  to  "  call 
no  man  master ;"  but  that  God  by  his  Providence  intended  to 
beat  us  off  from  this  reliance,  by  confounding  the  builders  of  such 
a  Babel,  even  in  the  days  of  those  who  had  seen  the  Apostles. 
Even  so  early  it  became  a  question,  on  what  time  they  should 
keep  Easter.  Both  sides  pleaded  with  confidence  that  their  tra- 
dition was  apostolical.  Polycarp  pleaded  that  he  had  been 
acquainted  with  the  Apostle  John.  Anicetus  of  Rome  pleaded 
that  he  had  his  tradition  from  the  Apostle  Peter.  Here  were  the 
Fathers  only  one  remove  from  the  Apostles,  on  a  plain  matter 
of  fact.  And  yet,  says  Stillingfleet,  "  So  great  were  the  heats,  so 
irreconcilable  the  controversy,  that  they  proceeded  to  hurl  the 
thunder  of  excommunication  in  each  other's  faces  ;  and  at  length 
Victor',  in  the  spirit  of  a  Pope,  excommunicated  all  the  Churches 
of  Asia,  for  differing  as  to  this  tradition.  The  small  coals  of  this 
contention  kindled  a  whole  ^Etna  of  contention  in  all  the  Chris- 
tian world." 

Now  what  was  good  in  the  so  called  Fathers  we  readily  ap- 
prove. Let  them  pass  for  witnesses  of  facts  which  came  under 
their  own  observation  ;  let  them,  if  they  please,  testify  as  to  their 
opinions ;  but  if  we  must  measure  the  doctrine  of  "  an  Apostle 
or  of  an  angel  from  Heaven"  by  the  Word  of  God,  how  much 
more  must  we  measure  the  opinion  of  the  Fathers?  We  can- 
not receive  as  the  standard  that  which  we  are  presently  to  PROVE 


THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OF  FAITH.  255 

by  another  measure.  This  difficulty  would  remain,  even  if  we 
could  separate  what  is  genuine  in  the  Fathers  from  that  which 
is  spurious. 

V.  If  the  standard  of  faith  is  to  be  the  Bible  as  interpreted  by 
the  first  two  centuries,  then  the  Episcopal  authorities  are  as  much 
to  be  blamed  for  not  fixing-  upon  the  authentic  ivritings  of  these 
two  centuries,  establishing  their  canon,  and  giving  them  to  the 
people,  as  the  popish  Prelates  are  for  withholding  from  the  people 
the  Bible.  Nay,  more  so  ;  for  on  this  scheme  the  "  Bible  alone" 
as  the  "  only  standard  faith,"  is  "  no  sufficient  bond  of  union  or 
stability;"  nay,  it  leads  to  "error,  heresies,  disunion,  and  confu- 
sion" without  end ! "  Miserable  people  that  have  not  the  ultimate 
standard  in  their  hands  ;  without  which  the  Bible  is  so  insuffi- 
cient and  so  erring  a  guide  !  Unfaithful  prelates  that  give  not 
even  a  translation;  no,  nor  a  poo:  abstract,  or  epitome;  no, 
nothing  but  a  poor  weak  decoction  or  infusion  of  the  fathers,  such 
as  happens  to  be  sprinkled,  we  know  not  where,  upon  the  pages 
of  the  Prayer-Book  !  The  people  should  either  demand  that  the 
Bible  shall  be  accompanied  by  the  Fathers  of  the  first  two  centu- 
ries, authentic,  unrnutilated,  uninterpolated,  so  that  they  may 
search  the  standard  of  faith  for  themselves,  or  they  should  re- 
nounce the  name  of  Protestants,  and  be  content  with  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  Fathers,  as  set  forth  and  interpreted  second-hand  by 
the  traditions  of  the  priests.  But  what  Episcopal  layman  or 
clergyman  pretends  that  he  can  accurately  fix  the  canon  of  the 
Fathers  of  the  first  two  centuries  ?  Has  Bishop  Brownell  him- 
self ever  read  all  those  interpretations  of  the  first  two  centuries, 
or  can  he,  for  his  life,  draw  the  line  between  the  spurious  and  the 
true  ?  No  well  informed  man  on  earth  will  have  the  impudence 
to  pretend  that  this  can  be  done.  Let  us  then  hear  no  more 
about  Popish  abominations.  The  extravagance  of  Romish  in- 
fallibility is  sober  reason  compared  with  this  specimen  of  Pro- 
testant Episcopal  folly  touching  the  standard  of  faith.* 

*  From  this  dreary  waste  of  error  and  absurdity,  it  is  refreshing  to  turn  back  to 
the  words  of  good  old  Bishop  Hooper,  who  sealed  his  faith  in  the  flames,  in  the  days 
of  the  Popish  Mary.  "  In  the  Blessed  Virgin's  time,  the  Pharisees  and,  Bishops  were 
accounted  the  TRUE  CHURCH  ;  yet  by  reason  their  doctrine  was  corrupt,  the  true  Church 
rested  not  with  them,  but  in  Simeon,  Zachary,  the  shepherds,  and  others.  So,  Paul 
teaches  us  that  whosoever  he  be  that  preaches  another  doctrine  than  the  Word  of 
God,  he  is  not  to  be  accredited  though  he  were  an  angel  from  Heaven.  *  *  The 
adversaries  of  truth  defend  many  a  false  error  under  the  name  of  HOLY  CHURCH  *  * 
and  when  the  Church  is  named,  we  ought  diligently  to  consider  when  the 
Articles  they  would  defend  were  accepted  of  the  Church,  by  whom,  and  who  was 
the  author  of  them,  and  not  leave  the  matter  till  it  is  brought  unto  the  first  original 
and  most  perfect  Church  of  the  Apostles.  If  you  find  by  their  writings  that  the 
Church  used  the  thing  which  the  preacher  would  prove,  accept  it,  or  else  not.  Be 
not  amazed  though  they  speak  of  ever  so  many  years  ;  or  name  ever  so  many  doc- 
tors. CHRIST  AND  HIS  APOSTLES  ARE  GRANDFATHERS  IN  AGE  TO  THE  DOCTORS 
AND  MASTERS  IN  LEARNING.  Fear  neither  the  ordinary  power  or  succession  of 
bishops,  nor  that  of  the  greater  part.  For  if  either  the  authority  of  Bishops  or  of 
the  greater  part  should  have  power  to  interpret  the  Scriptures;  the  sentence  of  the 


256  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

VI.  What  say  the  Scriptures  themselves  concerning1  the  ques- 
tion in  hand  ?  "The  law  of  the  Lord  is  PERFECT,  converting 
the  soul ;  the  testimony  of  the  Lord  is  SURE,  MAKING  WISE  THE 
SIMPLE."  Thus  speaks  the  Word  of  God.  Oh  no !  says  the 
man  with  a  surplice  and  mitre  from  Rome  :  not  " perfect"  nor 
"  sure"  but  mischievous  without  the  infallible  interpretations  of 
the  Church ;  the  Church  can  do  better  by  taking  the  testimony 
of  the  Lord  away.  And  thereupon  the  Protestant  Bishop  of 
Connecticut  raises  his  voice.  "  The  Bible  alone  !"  "  The  Bible 
without  note  or  comment !  "  To  the  exclusion  of  all  tradition 
and  Church  authority  !"  It  is  no  sufficient  "  bond  of  union  or 
stability !"  And  thereupon  he  rings  the  changes,  u  Heresies," 
"  Infidelity,"  "  Fanaticism." 

But  hear  again  the  Word  of  God  :  "  O  how  love  I  thy  law ! 
It  is  my  meditation  all  the  day.  Thou,  through  thy  command- 
ments, hast  made  me  wiser  than  mine  enemies  :  for  they  are 
ever  with  me.  I  have  more  understanding  than  all  my  teachers; 
for  thy  testimonies  are  my  meditation.  1  have  more  understanding 
than  the  ancients  (alas,  what  a  heresy  this  would  be  in  the  eyes 
of  the  Tractarians,  if  it  were  not  in  the  Bible !  Bat  so  it 
reads.)  I  HAVE  MORE  UNDERSTANDING  THAN  THE  ANCIENTS,  be- 
cause I  keep  thy  precepts"  "  THY  WORD  is  a  lamp  to  my  feet, 
and  a  light  to  my  path" 

We  had  supposed  that  "  The  Bible  alone  "  was  "  the  Religion 
of  Protestants"  We  had  humbly  supposed  it  a  sufficient  and 
perfect  guide,  "  given  by  inspiration  of  God," — that  "  the  man  of 
God  may  be  THOROUGHLY  FURNISHED"  with  that  which  is  "  able 
to  make  him  wise  unto  salvation."  We  had  supposed  that 
whoever  were  our  teacher,  we  were  still  to  "  search  the  Scrip- 
tures," "  to  see  whether  these  things  are  so."  We  turn  to  the 
History  of  the  World ;  and  though  some  have  "  wrested  the 
Scriptures  to  their  own  destruction,"  yet  the  History  of  the  World 
has  not  shown  for  any  two  hundred  years,  so  real  and  unwaver- 

Pharisees  should  have  been  preferred  before  the  sentence  of  Zacharias,  Simeon, 
Elizabeth,  or  the  Blessed  Virgin.  *  *  Remember  that  the  gift  of  interpretation 
of  Scripture,  is  the  light  of  the  Holy  Ghost  given  unto  the  humblest  penitent  per- 
sons, that  seek  it  only  to  honor  God  ;  and  not  unto  that  person  who  claims  it  by 
title  or  place,  because  he  is  a  bishop,  or  followed  by  succession,  Peter  or  Paul. 
Examine  their  laws  by  the  Scripture,  and  then  perceive  that  they  are  the  enemies  of 
Christ's  Church,  and  the  very  Church  of  Korah.  REMEMBER  THEREFORE  TO  EX- 
AMINE ALL  KINDS  OF  DOCTRINE  BY  THE  WORD  OF  GOD.  As  touching  the  ministers 
of  the  Church,  t  BELIEVE  THAT  THE  CHURCH  is  BOUND  to  no  SORT  of  people  or  ANY 

ORDINARY     SUCPESSION    OF     BlSHOPS,     CARDINALS,    OR    SUCH     LIKE,    BUT    UNTO 

THE  WORD   OF    GOD    ONLY." 

The  language  of  Hooper  was  the  common  language  of  the  Reformers.  Says 
Jewel,  "  There  is.  no  way  so  easy  to  beguile  the  simple  as  the  name  and  countenance  of  ike 
Fathers."  ''I  see  plainly,"  says  Chilli ngworth,  "and  with  mine  own  eyes,  that 
there  are  popes  against  popes,  councils  against  councils,  some  fathers  against  others  ; 
a  consent  of  fathers  of  one  age  against  the  consent  of  the  fathers  of  another  age  ;  the 
Church  of  one  age  against  the  Church  of  another  age;  traditive  interpretations  of 
Scripture  are  pretended,  but  there  are  few  or  none  to  be  found.  *  *  In  a  word, 
there  it  no  sufficiency  but  of  the  Scripture  only,  for  any  considering  man  to  build  upon." 


THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OF  FAITH. 

ing  a  uniformity  in  the  belief  of  the  simple  and  fundamental 
doctrines  of  grace,  as  has  been  found  among  the  several  denomi- 
nations who  receive  the  Bible  alone  as  the  sole  and  sufficient 
standard  of  faith  and  duty.  Wilh  all  their  conflicts  on  minor 
points,  there  has  been  in  fundamentals,  more  than  anywhere 
else,  One  Faith,  and  one  Lord.  Freedom  of  thought,  and  free 
discussion,  have  caused  at  times  sharp  controversy ;  error  de- 
serves it;  truth  is  worth  it :  but  in  ail,  the  truth  has  gained. 
Some  have  apostatised  :  but  the  Bible  is  before  them,  and  no 
superior  authority  binds  their  consciences  to  retain  the  error. 
Let  the  vast  corruptions  of  a  thousand  years  ;  let  the  corruptions 
now  rising  and  spreading  within  the  communion  paled  in  and 
fenced  by  Church  interpretations  and  Church  authority,  decide, 
whether,  within  such  fences,  these  apostates  would  have  done  any 
better.  "  There  must  be  heresies,"  says  the  Word  of  God, 
"  that  they  which  are  approved  may  be  made  manifest  among 
you."  The  great  mass  have  remained  firm  :  the  more  firm  from 
the  discussions  to  which  these  heresies  have  given  rise.  "  The 
sword  of  the  Spirit "  is  not  the  interpretations  of  the  Church,  but 
"  The  Word  of  God."  If  you  would  repress  heresy,  leave  that 
sword  unsheathed.  A  pious  prayerful  soul  may  be  trusted  with 
that ;  a  wilful  heretic  will  not  be  put  down  with  a  human  decree 
or  canon.  Bind  not  up  the  thoughtful  inquirer  to  believe  on  the 
authority  of  human  interpretations  and  canons,  lest  his  faith  rest 
on  the  wisdom  of  man,  rather  than  on  the  Word  of  God.  Rear 
up  fences  of  forms,  interpretations,  and  decrees ;  and  you  may 
perpetuate  your  own  folly ;  you  may  thrust  your  wisdom  be- 
tween the  soul  and  the  authority  of  God ;  you  may  arrogate  to 
yourself  the  authority  of  conservator  over  the  understanding  of 
future  generations,  as  well  as  of  God's  Holy  Truth  ; — but  you 
may  at  the  same  time  perpetuate  heresy  and  darkness,  and  lay 
the  foundations  of  a  spiritual  bondage  under  which  your  chil- 
dren's children  may  groan  in  hopeless  misery.  But  let  a  conti- 
nent sink  in  error  ;  let  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand  blinded 
priests  conspire  to  hold  them  in  bondage  ;  yet  throw  these  fences 
down,  and  send  forth  one  living  man  with  "  the  Sword  of  the 
Spirit,  which  is  the  Word  of  God  ;" — and  darkness  and  super- 
stition will  flee  before  him.  That  sword  of  the  Spirit  which  is 
the  most  powerful  to  conquer,  is  most  powerful  to  defend.  Give 
us  this,  and  let  error  take  the  field  ;  let  Satan  come  in  subtlety 
or  in  wrath  ;  and  we  have  wherewithal  to  quench  his  fiery  darts. 
But  remove  the  faith  of  the  people  one  step  from  the  Word  of 
God,  and  try  to  fence  it  round  by  human  decrees  and  forms, 
and  the  incipient  apostasy  has  begun  its  march ;  the  mystery^  of 
iniquity  is  at  work ;  nothing  but  the  special  providence  of  God 
can  prevent  Anti-christ  from  being,  in  time,  fully  developed  and 
revealed.  17 


_ 


XIX. 


ON  THE  ALLEGED  RIGHT  TO  IMPOSE  LITURGIES 
AND  CEREMONIES. 

Illustrated  by  the  Doctrines  of  Holy  Alliance.  Enormities  in  practice. 
Necessarily  a  system  of  usurpation  and  persecution.  Natural  rights  of 
Christian  congregations.  Plea  of  uniformity.  The  question  not  of  the 
expediency  of  a  Liturgy,  but  of  the  right  to  impose  one.  Canons  of 
American  Episcopacy.  Limits  of  Church  power. 

ANOTHER  fundamental  principle  which  demands  discussion,  sepa- 
rate from  all  consideration  of  Church  organization,  or  modes  of 
discipline  and  worship,  is  the  alleged  right  to  frame  Liturgies 
and  devise  ceremonies  for  the  worship  of  God;,  to  forbid  Christians 
to  celebrate  public  worship  in  any  other  mode  ;  and  to  enforce  these 
Liturgies  and  ceremonies  by  penalties,  either  civil  or  ecclesi- 
astical. 

The  importance  of  this  topic  will  be  better  appreciated  by  a 
reference  to  some  instances  of  parallel  usurpations  in  civil  af- 
fairs. Such  a  reference  will  show  what  fundamental  principles 
are  worth  ;  and  how  many  seeds  of  despotism,  mischief,  and  wo, 
may  be  wrapped  up  in  a  seemingly  innocent  line. 

Those  who  are  old  enough  to  remember  the  campaign  of  Bona- 
parte in  Russia,  will  call  to  mind  the  famous  HOLY  ALLIANCE 
formed  by  several  of  the  crowned  heads  of  Europe.  Its  object  was, 
professedly,  the  peace  and  stability  of  the  European  nations.  "  The 
world,"  says  Daniel  Webster,  "  seems  to  have  received  this  treaty 
upon  its  first  promulgation,  with  general  charity.  It  was  com- 
monly understood,  as  little  or  nothing  more  than  an  expression 
of  thanks  for  the  successful  termination  of  the  momentous  con- 
test in  which  these  sovereigns  had  been  engaged."*  "  In  the 
name  of  the  Most  Holy  Trinity,"  said  their  manifesto,  "  their  Ma- 
jesties solemnly  declare,  that  the  present  act  has  no  other  object 
than  to  publish  in  the  face  of  the  wrhole  world,  their  fixed  resolu- 
tion, both  in  the  administration  of  their  respective  states,  and  in 
their  political  relations  with  every  other  government,  to  take  for 

*  Speech  on  the  Greek  Revolution. 


ALLEGED  RIGHT  TO  IMPOSE  LITURGIES. 

their  sole  guide  the  precepts  of  that  Holy  Religion — namely,  the 
precepts  of  justice,  Christian  charity,  and  peace — which,  far  from 
being  applicable  only  to  private  concerns,  must  have  an  imme- 
diate influence  on  the  councils  of  princes,  and  guide  all  their 
steps,  as  being  the  only  means  of  consolidating  human  institu- 
tions, and  remedying  their  imperfections." 

All  this  appeared  vastly  well.  It  is  probable  that  they  were 
sincere  ;  and  that  Alexander,  at  least,  the  great  soul  of  the  Alli- 
ance, was  actuated  by  the  most  beneficent  motives. 

This  Alliance,  then,  was  made  to  keep  the  peace  of  Europe; 
and  to  enforce  that  peace  and  the  observance  of  the  principles  of 
justice  and  Christianity  among  nations  (in  the  language  of  Web- 
ster), "  by  a  million  and  a  half  of  bayonets" 

But  now  there  arose  a  momentous  question :  What  do  these 
princes  deem  to  be  "  the  principles  of  Christianity  and  justice," 
with  regard  to  human  governments  ?  Oh  !  the  Divine  Right  of 
Kings  :  and  the  absolute  destitution  of  all  political  rights  on  the 
part  of  the  people !  It  was  not  long  before  they  revealed  the 
principles  on  which  their  conduct  was  to  be  governed.  The  first 
principle  they  put  forth  was  in  these  words :  "  All  popular  or  con- 
stitutional rights  are  holden  no  otherwise  than  as  grants  from  the 
crown"  " Society,"  says  Webster,  " upon  this  principle,  has  no 
rights  of  its  own :  it  takes  good  government  when  it  can  get  it, 
as  a  boon  and  a  concession  ;  but  can  demand  nothing.  It  is  to 
live  in  that  favor  which  emanates  from  regal  authority ;  and  if  it 
have  the  misfortune  to  lose  that  favor,  there  is  nothing  to  protect 
it  against  any  degree  of  injustice  and  oppression.  It  can  right- 
fully make  no  endeavor  for  a  change  by  itself.  *  *  *  All  its 
duty  is  described  in  the  single  word  SUBMISSION." 

The  Holy  Alliance  was  not  slow  to  draw  the  same  conclusion. 
In  the  Laybach  Circular,  of  May,  1821,  they  declared,  "  That 
useful  and  necessary  changes  in  legislation  ought  to  emanate 
from  the  free  will  and  intelligent  conviction  of  those  whom  God 
has  rendered  responsible  for  power ;  and  that  all  that  deviate  from 
this  line,  necessarily  tend  to.  disorder,  commotions,  and  evils,  far 
more  insupportable^  than  those  which  they  pretended  to  remedy" 

On  this  principle,  the  English  Barons  who,  six  hundred  years 
ago,  after  suffering  from  the  intolerable  tyranny  of  King  John, 
sword  in  hand,  wrested  the  Great  Charter  from  that  infamous 
king  at  Runnimede, — were  entirely  to  blame !  If  the  Holy  Alli- 
ance had  existed  then,  it  would  have  put  the  Barons  down.  The 
king  had  a  divine  right  to  rule  the  English  ;  responsible  only  to 
God :  and  they  must  submissively  wait  till  the  tyrant  should 
grow  kind. 

Our  notions  of  freedom  are  such  as  to  make  the  very  name 
of  charter  and  liberties,  in  the  English  sense,  a  reproach.  Our 


260  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

franchises  we  hold  by  no  kingly  charter :  nor  do  we  hold  these 
as  liberties,  but  as  RIGHTS  which  we  will  VINDICATE, — not  ask  as 
a  favor  from  any  power  below  that  of  God.  "  I  need  not  stop," 
says  Webster,  "  to  observe  how  totally  hostile  are  these  doctrines 
of  Laybach,  to  the  fundamental  principles  of  our  government. 
They  are  in  direct  contradiction  ;  the  principles  of  good  and 
evil  are  hardly  more  opposite.  If  these  principles  of  the  sove- 
reigns be  true,  we  are  but  in  a  state  of  rebellion,  or  of  anarchy, 
and  are  only  tolerated  among  civilized  states,  because  it  has  not 
yet  been  convenient  to  conform  us  to  the  true  standard." 

The  Holy  Alliance  pursued  the  principle  to  its  legitimate  issue. 
They  declared  that  "  The  Powers"  [the  Alliance]  "have 'an  un- 
doubted right  to  take  a  hostile  attitude  in  regard  to  those  states 
in  which  the  overthrow  of  the  government  may  operate  as  an  ex- 
ample" 

"  There  cannot,"  says  Webster,  "  be  conceived  a  more  flagrant 
violation  of  public  law,  or  national  independence,  than  is  con- 
tained in  this  short  declaration."  *  *  "  No  matter  what  be 
the  character  of  the  government  resisted ;  no  matter  with  what 
weight  the  foot  of  the  oppressor  bears  on  the  neck  of  the  oppress- 
ed ;  if  he  struggle,  or  if  he  complain,  he  sets  a  dangerous  exam- 
ple of  resistance  ;  and  from  that  moment  he  becomes  an  object 
of  hostility  to  the  most  powerful  potentates  of  the  earth.  Iwant 
words  to  express  my  abhorrence  of  this  abominable  principle.  I 
trust  every  enlightened  man  throughout  the  world  will  oppose  it ; 
and  that  especially  those  who,  like  ourselves,  are  fortunately  out 
of  the  reach  of  the  bayonets  that,  enforce  it,  will  proclaim  their 
detestation  of  it  both  loud  and  decisive." 

But  why  this  outcry  at  a  mere  abstract  principle?  On  that 
principle  depends  the  movement  of  a  million  and  a  half  of  bay- 
onets; and  the  question  of  despotism  or  freedom  throughout  the 
globe.  That  principle  soon  awoke  to  vigorous  life.  The  people 
of  Spain,  worn  out  with  inquisitorial  cruelties  and  grinding  op- 
pression, rose  in  their  might,  and  established  a  Constitution.  The 
bayonets  of  France,  as  the  instruments  of  the  Alliance,  advanced 
across  the  Pyrenees  and  put  that  Constitution  down.  Greece 
rose  against  the  bloody  rule  of  the  Turks.  When  the  revolu- 
tion broke  out,  the  sovereigns  were  in  Congress  at  Laybach,  and 
declared  "  their  abhorrence  of  those  criminal  combinations  which 
had  been  formed  in  the  eastern  part  of  Europe"  "  The  practical 
commentary,"  says  Webster,  "  corresponded  with  the  plain  lan- 
guage of  the  text.  Look  at  Spain.  Look  at  Greece.  If  men 
may  not  resist  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  and  the  Turkish  Cimetar, 
what  is  there  to  which  humanity  must  not  submit?  Stronger 
cases  can  never  arise." 

The  butchery  of  the  Turks  was  too  horrid :  nature  cried  out 


ALLEGED    RIGHT    TO    IMPOSE    LITURGIES.  261 

against  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Alliance.  The  genius  of  Eng- 
land prevailed.  The  Turkish  authority  was  broken:  but  mark; 
— 'The  Greeks  must  not  be  free !  The  republics  of  Greece  re- 
stored in  the  midst  of  despotic  Europe  !  O  no :  they  must  have 
a  king.  A  weak,  wrong-headed  boy,  a  scion  of  some  legitimate 
succession,  must  be  set  to  reign  over  the  high-spirited  republican 
Greeks ! 

The  Holy  Alliance  turned  their  thoughts  to  the  insurrectionary 
provinces  of  South  America,  and  their  bayonets  would  have 
re-established  there  the  authority  of  Spain  :  but  Great  Britain 
would  not  be  a  partner  in  the  crime ;  the  fleets  of  Britain  were 
to  be  encountered  on  the  sea;  and  beyond,  lay  that  Young  Re- 
public, whose  chief  magistrate  had  in  his  message  intimated  the 
determination  of  the  people,  that  on  this  continent  such  things 
must  not  be  done. 

The  principle  of  the  Holy  Alliance  reached  even  to  the  evil 
example  of  our  Revolution,  and  of  our  Republican  Institutions: 
nor  is  there  room  to  question,  that  not  their  good  will,  nor  their 
forbearance,  but  the  good  hand  of  God,  and  the  difficulty  of  the 
undertaking,  kept  the  Holy  Alliance  from  sending  their  bayonets 
to  set  up  a  monarchy  in  this  American  land.  They  did  not  believe 
that  any  government  established  and  wielded  by  the  people  could 
be  VALID.  They  did  not  believe  that  there  could  lawfully  be  "  A 

STATK    WITHOUT  A     KlNG." 

So  much  for  a  principle.  The  illustration  has  been  long ;  but 
not  too  long  for  its  importance. 

How  does  the  illustration  apply  to  the  case  in  hand  ?  The 
Church,  alias  the  Hierarchy,  set  up  a  claim,  not  only  to  be  the 
judge  of  faith  with  authority  paramount  to  all  rights  of  private 
judgment;  but  they  claim  also  a  right  to  frame  liturgies,  and 
ceremonies,  for  the  worship  of  God,  and  to  impose  the  same  upon 
all  Christians.  I  say — UPON  ALL  CHRISTIANS.  Whoever,  being 
within  the  pale  of  that  Church,  presumes  to  worship  God  in 
public  in  any  other  way,  is  ecclesiastically  punished,  or  cast  out. 
Whatever  bodies  of  Christians  presume  to  worship  God,  with- 
out submitting  to  this  Hierarchy,  and  to  its  liturgies  and  ceremo- 
nies, they  are  regarded  as  wicked  schismatics;  and  with  their 
ministers  are  held  up  to  abhorrence  as  followers  of  Korah.  In 
this  principle,  and  in  this  line  of  conduct,  Episcopalians  both 
Popish  and  Protestant,  with  some  honorable  exceptions  fully 
agree* 

This  principle  has  been  tried  on  a  vast  scale,  and  for  a  period 
of  more  than  a  thousand  years.  And  what  has  been  the  result  ? 
A  despotism  a  thousand  times  more  iron-handed  and  bloody 
than  that  of  the  Holy  Alliance.  What  mummeries  ;  what  false 
doctrines  ;  what  idolatrous  rites ;  what  prayers  to  the  saints  and 


262  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  Virgin ;  \^Jiat  adoration  of  images  and  relics  did  not  the 
Church  impose  !  What  oceans  of  blood  were  shed,  to  which  all 
thai  has  ever  been  shed  by  the  Holy  Alliance  has  been  as  a  single 
drop  !  What  thousands  of  martyrs  have  perished  at  the  stake  ! 
How  the  snows  of  the  mountains  have  gleamed  with  the  confla- 
grations of  the  burning  homes  of  the  disciples  of  Jesus  !  How 
the  rocks  amid  the  midnight  darkness  have  echoed  back  their 
screams  of  agony !  What  tales  of  suffering  have  the  prisons  to 
declare  !  What  secrets  of  horror  have  the  vaults  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion to  reveal!  How  long  and  how  dreary  the  darkness  that 
brooded  over  the  face  of  the  entire  Christian  world ! 

Were  these  the  doings  of  Rome?  They  were  the  legitimate 
results  of  the  PRINCIPLE  that  the  Church  has  authority  to  ordain 
Liturgies  and  ceremonies  for  the  worship  of  God,  and  to  require 
the  people  to  submit  to  the  same.  Is  this  the  principle  exclusively 
of  Rome  ?  Our  fathers  fled  from  the  cruelties  of  the  same  princi- 
ple inflicted  upon  them  by  Protestant  hands.  Some  of  them  were 
compelled  by  Protestant  hands  to  drink  the  cup  of  martyrdom. 
Some  were  spoiled  of  their  goods.  Some  were  pilloried,  mutilated, 
scourged.  Multitudes  perished  in  prison,  of  starvation  and  cold. 
Read  the  sufferings  of  the  Scotch  Covenanters  under  the  persecu- 
tions and  dragoonings  of  the  licentious  and  bloody  Charles  II. 
They  were  hanged  on  the  gallows,  tied  to  the  stake  at  low  water 
and  drowned  by  the  rising  tide  ;  shot  down  in  the  fields,  or  on  the 
green  grass  before  their  own  fire-sides ;  hunted  in  the  morasses 
and  glens ;  and  their  bodies  left  unburied  to  be  devoured  by  the 
birds  of  prey.*  These  things  were  done  by  Protestant  High- 
Churchmen,  and  since  the  last  of  them,  one  hundred  and  sixty 
years  have  not  yet  passed  away !  From  that  day  to  this,  the 
same  ruthless  principle  has  borne  upon  all  who  have  scrupled  to 
receive  Liturgies  and  rituals ;  in  disabilities,  vexatious  oppres- 
sions, and  in  every  form  of  severity  that  the  period  of  the  world 
would  endure.  Why,  we  are  told  even  in  this  American  land, 
that  not  only  has  the  Church  authority  to  impose  these  things, 
but  that  without  these  imposed  Liturgies  and  rituals,  the 
fold  of  Jesus  is  an  " unfenced  field"  Prelates  tell  us  that  it 
will  not  do  for  the  people  and  their  ministers  to  be  trusted  with 
freedom  in  the  worship  of  God !  Oh,  no !  liberty  in  this  matter 
is  a  dangerous  possession  to  the  people;  the  Prelates  can 
manage  to  keep  it  better !  These  canons,  saints'  days,  angels' 
days,  Liturgies  and  rituals,  are  very  useful !  A  liberty  to  wor- 
ship God  without  them  is  very  pernicious,  and  therefore  the 

*  "  It  is  supposed  that  Popery  has  put  to  death  fifteen  millions  of  persons  for 
truth's  sake.  *  *  In  the  years  1684  and  1685,  EIGHTY  PERSONS  were  shot  in  the 
fields  in  cold  blood  in  Scotland." — (Traditions  of  the  Covenanters,  p.  170.)  This  was 
an  inconsiderable  item  in  the  account  of  the  murders  perpetrated  by  the  Protestant 
High- Churchmen  in  Scotland. 


ALLEGED  RIGHT  TO  IMPOSE.  LITURGIES.  263 

Church  as  a  good  mother  has  taken  that  liberty  away !  And 
thereupon  Bishops  give  charges,  and  presbyters  preach  sermons, 
to  show  what  schisms,  heresies,  errors,  fanaticisms,  spring  up  for 
the  want  of  these  very  valuable  and  holy  fences  to  restrain  the 
very  dangerous  liberty  of  people  to  worship  God ;  saying  less  or 
more  than  the  Liturgy  prescribes !  Just  so  Rome  talks  about  the 
pernicious  results  of  allowing  the  people  liberty  to  read  the  Bible 
for  themselves. 

Do  you  not  see  the  principle  ol  the  Holy  Alliance  still  ?  De- 
spotic Austria  comforts  her  good  people  by  telling  them  of  the 
horrors  of  liberty.  She  points  to  the  strife  of  political  parties  in 
these  United  States,  to  show  how  dangerous  it  is  for  people  to 
be  allowed  to  choose  their  own  rulers,  and  how  ineffably  superior 
is  the  Divine  Right  of  Kings  to  the  freedom  of  the  people  !  nay, 
she  shows  them  by  conclusive  arguments  that  absolute  despotism 
is  the  only  possible  freedom  !  She  points  to  these  unhappy  States 
as  a  demonstration  of  the  mischiefs  of  popular  discussion,  of  a 
free-press,  and  of  popular  rights  ;  and  then  points  to  the  repose, 
stability,  and  uniformity  of  a  despotic  government.  Blessed 
Austria  !  No  popular  rights  to  create  disturbances !  No  popu- 
lar discussions  of  political  subjects  !  No  popular  elections !  A 
good  censorship  of  the  press,  and  a  close  espionage  over  every 
man's  lips,  to  "fence "  out  error  I  Blessed  Austria !  whose 
people  are  trained  to  regard  with  silent  horror  this  miserable,  wild, 
unhappy  democracy — this  State  without  a  king,  across  the 
waters ! 

Now,  I  pray  you,  whither  tends  all  the  talk,  that  this  commu- 
nity has  of  late  heard,  about  the  benefit  of  ecclesiastical  "  fences," 
and  all  this  outcry  about  heresies  and  schisms  for  the  want  of 
liturgies  and  of  a  better  standard  of  faith  than  the  Bible  ;  whither 
tend  all  these  harangues,  but  to  show,  after  the  example  of  Aus- 
tria and  the  Holy  Alliance,  the  mischiefs  of  liberty,  and  the  bene- 
fit of  despotism  in  Church  as  well  as  in  State  ?  Granting  that 
all  these  cries  of  heresies  were  true  (as  they  are  not,  but  false), 
as  to  the  main  drift  of  these  allegations  (since  heresies  prevail 
far  more  within  the  fences  of  liturgies  and  rituals  than  without 
them ;  and  discussion  in  the  Episcopal  fold,  is,  or  ought  to  be 
as  earnest  as  anywhere  else)  :  granting  that  all  these  allegations 
were  true — still  despotism  is  not  the  remedy.  If  it  were,  even 
Protestant  Prelatists  might  return  with  some  advantage  to  Rome. 
Prince  Metternich  may  persuade  the  Austrians  that  they  live  un- 
der a  more  blessed  government  than  that  of  the  United  States  ; 
and  so  the  prelates  may  persuade  their  people,  that  prelates  and 
priests  can  do  much  better  for  them  by  taking  their  religious 
liberties  away ;  but  we  trust  that  such  doctrines  can  never  be  so 
sweetened  and  smoothed  as  to  make  them  extensively  palatable 


264  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

to  the  sons  of  the  Pilgrims,  or  to  the  descendants  of  the  Patriots 
of  Seventy-Six. 

Will  it  be  said  that  the  Episcopal  Church,  in  these  United  States, 
neither  professes  nor  claims  the  power  to  enforce  her  canons, 
liturgies  and  forms  by  civil  penalties  ? 

She  nevertheless  does  enforce  them  by  all  the  penalties  within 
her  power.  She  claims  a  right  to  rule  all  the  disciples  of  Christ 
within  this  territory  ;  and  declares,  and  treats,  all  who  do  not 
submit,  as  guilty  schismatics.  She  claims  it  as  the  duty  of  all 
Christians  to  forsake  every  other  Church,  and  to  cleave  only  to 
her,  as  the  only  true  Church  ;  out  of  which  there  are  no  cove- 
nanted mercies  of  God.  She  then  cuts  off  every  minister,  every 
man,  and  every  congregation,  that  does  not  submit  to  these  man- 
made  and  man-imposed  liturgies,  rituals,  and  decrees.  What  is 
this  but  usurpation  and  persecution  ? 

If  it  is  our  duty  to  belong  to  a  particular  Church,  then  that  duty 
involves  a  right  to  enter  it  and  remain  there,  in  the  enjoyment  of 
all  the  franchises  wherewith  Christ  has  made  his  people  free. 
He  who  curtails  those  franchises  is  a  usurper.  He  who  puts  up 
a  single  bar  which  Christ  has  not  put  up,  or  which  Christ  has 
not  authorized  him  to  put  up,  is  a  usurper.  If  Christ  has  not 
enjoined  ceremonies,  rituals,  or  liturgies,  then  any  congregation 
of  Christ1  s  people  has  an  indefeasible  right  to  worship  him  without; 
and  he  who  shuts  another  out  of  the  Church  or  the  ministry  be- 
cause that  other  cannot  in  conscience,  or  according  to  his  sense 
of  propriety,  observe  the  ceremonies  and  liturgies  which  man  has 
made  to  prescribe  and  limit  the  worship  of  God,  is  both  an 

USURPER  AND  SCHISMATIC.    HE  HAS  USURPED  THE  RIGHTS  OF  MAN  AND 

THE  PREROGATIVES  OF  GOD.  The  so  styled  Church,  which  claims 
authority  over  a  nation  or  a  province  (even  admitting,  as  we  do 
not,  that  its  entire  authority  is  not  usurped),  has  no  more  right  to 
impose  upon  the  several  congregations  a  Liturgy,  than  it  has  to 
impose  a  set  form  of  sermons,  and  to  forbid  any  other  sermon  or 
exhortation.  Nay,  for  a  book  of  sermons  a  better  pretence  might 
be  made,  viz.  the  necessity  of  guarding  the  doctrines  of  the 
Church.  The  so  styled  "  Church,"  of  a  nation  or  province 
(which  we  deny  to  be  any  Church  at  all,  in  its  national  or  pro- 
vincial organization  or  authority),  has  no  more  right  to  require, 
of  the  several  congregations,  the  ceremony  of  kneeling  at  the  sa- 
crament, than  it  has  to  require  them  to  celebrate  Mass  ;  it  has  no 
more  right  to  require  the  observance  of  Lent,  or  Saints'  days, 
than  it  has  to  require  them  to  fast  on  Fridays  ;  no  more  right  to 
silence  a  minister  or  to  exclude  a  member  for  refusing  to  obey 
such  canons,  than  it  has  to  cut  off  their  heads.  He  who  cuts  me 
off  from  the  franchises  with  which  Christ  has  endowed  me,  he 
who  forbids  me  to  worship  God  in  public  without  the  use  of  a 


ALLEGED  RIGHT  TO  IMPOSE   LITURGIES.  265 

prescribed  Liturgy,  hinders  and  obstructs  me  from  discharging 
the  duties  which  Christ  has  commanded  me.  It  matters  not 
whether  it  is  some  "  Diotrephes  "  who  "  loveth  to  have  the  pre- 
eminence," that  has  done  it,  u  casting  them  out  of  the  Church  ;" 
or  whether  some  Hierarchy,  or  clique,  who  have  seen  fit  to  im- 
pose, what  neither  Christ  nor  his  Apostles  enjoined  for  the  worship 
of  God  ;  arid  who  take  it  upon  them  to  cast  Christ's  people  out 
of  his  Church,  because  they  will  not  obey  these  man-made  de- 
crees ;  they  are  usurpers,  schismatics,  and  persecutors. 

But  it  is  said  that  liturgies  and  prescribed  rituals  are  necessary 
FOR  SECURING  UNIFORMITY.  Did  Christ  require  all  congregations 
to  observe  an  exact  uniformity,  in  every  word  and  ritual,  when 
assembled  for  the  worship  of  God  ?  The  colors  of  the  rainbow 
are  not  all  alike.  The  beautiful  flowers,  and  trees,  and  land- 
scapes, are  not  all  alike.  The  rivers  and  valleys  are  not  all  alike. 
The  minds  and  tastes  of  men  are  not  all  alike ;  their  circumstances 
and  wants  are  not  all  alike  ;  the  times  in  which  they  live  are  not 
all  alike  ;  that  prayers  and  praises  may  be  stinted  and  limited  to 
suit  the  character,  circumstances,  and  wants  of  all  alike.  Besides, 
the  Liturgy  of  England  is  not  uniform  with  that  of  Rome,  or  with 
any  other  Liturgy.  If  it  were  so,  uniformity  is  not  unity. 

It  is  not  the  right,  or  the  expediency  of  using  a  Liturgy,  which 
here  comes  into  question  ;  but  the  right  to  enforce  a  Liturgy,  on 
congregations  of  Christians  who  do  not  choose  it.  Nor  would 
the  question  be  the  same,  if  the  Liturgy  were  enforced  only  upon 
those  who  choose  to  unite  with  the  communion  to  which  a  Lit- 
urgy is  prescribed;  while  others  should  be  allowed  to  worship 
elsewhere  as  they  please.  The  Episcopal  Church  makes  not  this 
allowance;  it  claims  to  be  "  THE  CHURCH,"  with  RIGHT  TO  RULE 
OVER  ALL  :  it  treats  all  others  as  schismatics  out  of  the  pale  of 
the  covenanted  mercies  of  God.  And  holding  forth  these  exclu- 
sive claims,  it  writes  this  its  FORTY-FIFTH  CANON,  for  the  due  ob- 
servance of  all  Christians  who  shall  attempt  to  worship  God : 
"  Every  minister  shall,  before  all  sermons  and  lectures,  and  on  all 
other  occasions  of  public  worship, use  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer, 
as  the  same  is  or  may  be  established  by  the  authority  of.  the  General 
Convention  of  this  Church.  And  in  performing  said  service,  no 
other  prayers  shall  be  used  than  those  prescribed  by  said  book." 
On  this  canon,  Dr.  Hawkes  remarks,  that  some  of  the  clergy 
"  have  felt  themselves  at  liberty,  after  the  sermon,  to  make  an  ex- 
temporary prayer.  Very  few,  however,"  he  adds,  "  it  is  be- 
lieved, have  done  so."  He  gives  it  as  his  opinion,  that  such  a 
practice  is  not  in  accordance  with  the  canon :  "  as  its  purpose 
was,  on  all  occasions  of  public  worship,  to  render  OBLIGATORY 
the  use  of  a  rescript  form  of  prayer :"  which  rescript  he  con- 
siders as  obligatory  "  after  the  sermon  as  before."* 

*  Constitution  and  Canons  of  t.be  Episcopal  Church,  p  377. 


266 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


Now,  to  my  mind,  such  a  Marion  is  a  horrible  usurpation  and 
tyranny,  to  which  no  Christian  should  ever  submit.  What !  for 
such  a  man  as  the  venerated  Dr.  Milnor,  or  Leigh  Richmond,  in 
the  habit  of  praying  without  book,  and  entirely  capable  of  pour- 
ing out  his  soul  in  warm,  living  language  ;  for  such  a  man,  under 
circumstances  of  peculiar  interest,  or  of  great  and  startling  emer- 
gency ;  or  after  a  sermon,  when  sinners  are  awakened,  and  in 
tears,  to  be  told,  No,  you  must  not  offer  an  extemporary 
prayer ;  the  canon  forbids  it !  You  shall  be  liable  never  to  be 
allowed  to  preach  the  Gospel  more,  if  you  transgress  the  canon  ! 
For  such  a  man,  and  for  the  congregation,  too,  while  the  spirit 
within  him  is  groaning  for  utterance,  to  be  limited  to  a  rescript, 
form aif  general  Collect,  of  no  adaptedness  to  the  occasion  !  What 
is  it  but  the  grossest  tyrannyl  an  insult  to  God  !  an  outrage  upon 
the  dearest  rights  of  man !  How  nearly  it  savors  of  the  proceeding 
of  Darius  the  king,  when,  at  the  instigation  of  the  presidents, 
governors,  and  princes,  he  made  a  "  Decree  that  whosoever  should 
ask  a  petition  of  any  God  or  man,  save  of  the  king,  for  thirty 
days,  should  be  cast  into  the  den  of  lions."  What  right  has  the 
Church  to  prescribe  prayers  more  than  sermons  ?  Why  might 
she  not,  with  the  same  propriety,  prescribe  a  sermon-book ;  and 
decree  by  canon,  that  if  any  warm-hearted  minister  should  pre- 
sume to  venture  an  exhortation,  not  prescribed  in  the  book,  be 
should  be  cast  out  of  the  Church,  or  silenced,  according  to  the 
canon  ? 

How  often  is  the  Prayer-Book  lean  and  barren,  when  com- 
pared with  the  occasion  ?  I  remember  one  gloomy  Sabbath 
morning  during  the  last  war  with  Great  Britain,  when  every  man 
capable  of  bearing  arms  was  summoned  from  my  native  village 
to  meet  the  invading  foe ; — how  desolate  the  Sanctuary  seemed 
when  none  but  the  aged,  the  women,  and  the  children  were 
there ;  what  tears  were  shed  ;  what  stifled  sobs  were  heard, 
when  the  minister  poured  forth  his  prayer  adapted  to  the  dangers 
of  their  loved  ones,  and  to  the  sorrows  and  fears  of  those  who 
remained.  I  remember  hearing  the  people  in  a  town  on  the 
shores  of  Lake  Champlain,  near  the  northern  line  of  Vermont, 
tell, — how  on  the  14th  of  September,  1814 — when  nearly  all 
their  men  were  gone  across  the  lake  to  meet  the  overwhelming 
force  of  the  enemy,  who  were  only  waiting  the  coming  up  of 
the  fleet,  to  begin  the  combat ;  on  the  morning  of  that  Sabbath, 
the  British  fleet  was  descried  sweeping  by ;  and  as  the  bell  was 
tolling  for  public  worship,  the  roar  of  the  battle  began ;  they 
saw  the  smoke  ;  they  heard  the  distant  thunder ;  their  husbands 
and  fathers  and  brothers  were  there.  The  man  of  God  entered 
with  a  firm  step  into  the  place  of  worship,  and  without  taking 
his  seat,  or  a  moment's  pause — lifted  up  his  hands  and  said,  LET 


ALLEGED  RIGHT  TO  IMPOSE  LITURGIES.  267 

us  PRAY.  Nor  while  that  combat  raged,  did  he  cease  to  pray . 
nor  the  anxious  congregation  to  mingle  their  tears  and  sobbings 
with  their  prayers.  O,  for  the  Church  to  come  in  with  its  canons 
at  such  a  time  :  and  say  to  the  man  of  God,  Here,  take  the  book  ; 
the  Church  forbids  you  to  call  upon  God,  save  only  in  this  re- 
script form!  WJio  is  the  Church,  that  comes  thus  to  interfere 
with  individual  ministers  and  congregations ;  and  to  stand  be- 
tween their  souls  and  the  Throne,  when  they  assemble  to  wor- 
ship God  ? — But  this  inquiry  belongs  to  another  place,  in  which 
we  trust  it  will  appear  that  Christ  has  left  no  such  authority — no 
such  "  Church  "  on  earth,  as  the  authority  by  which  these  canons 
and  liturgies  are  framed  and  imposed. 

But  supposing,  as  we  do  at  present  for  the  argument's  sake,  that 
what  claims  to  be  "  The  Church  "  is  such  in  reality,  and  may 
rightfully  exercise  ecclesiastical  powers  :  even  on  this  supposition, 
Christ  has  given  no  power  of  prescribing  liturgies  and  ceremo- 
nies for  the  worship  of  God,  to  any  human  authority.  The 
commission  to  the  Apostles  was  (and  surely  none  may  go  be- 
yond this) — "  Teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  1 
have  commanded  you"  No  Church  authority,  therefore,  may  go 
beyond,  and  charge  upon  the  conscience,  or  lay  an  incumbrance 
upon  the  worship  of  God,  beyond  what  Christ  has  commanded. 
John  Cotton  has  well  remarked  on  this  passage,  "  if  the  Apostles 
teach  people  to  observe  more  than  Christ  has  commanded,  they 
go  beyond  their  commission  ;  and  a  larger  commission  than  that 
given  to  the  Apostles,  nor  Elders,  nor  Synods,  nor  Churches  can 
challenge." 

But  it  is  said  that  the  Church  has  authority  to  order  IN  THINGS 
INDIFFERENT.  Who  is  to  judge  whether  the  thing  imposed  be 
indifferent?  Does  the  Church  then  judge  a  liturgy  to  be  indiffer- 
ent ?  Sponsors  in  baptism ;  and  other  things  which  she  pre- 
scribes for  the  worship  of  God,  and  for  the  Sacraments  ; — -does 
she  judge  these  all  indifferent?  Under  this  notion  of  indiffer- 
ence were  brought  in  all  the  mummeries  of  Rome;  and  Rome, 
as  well  as  the  English  Church,  judged  that  she  had  a  right  to 
overrule  all  scruples  of  conscience,  as  to  what  things  were,  or 
were  not  indifferent. 

But  imposing  things  indifferent  is  more  than  Apostles  durst 
do  ;  for  when  certain  from  Judea  told  the  disciples  of  Antioch 
that  they  must  be  circumcised,  and  advice  was  asked  of  the 
Church  at  Jerusalem  with  the  Apostles  and  elders ;  these  having 
the  Holy  Ghost,  concluded  to  lay  upon  them  no  greater  burden 
than  some  "NECESSARY  things"  Who  now  may  go  beyond, 
and  impose  things  unnecessary,  i.  e.  things  indifferent  ?  "  What 
charter"  says  Stillingfleet,  "  has  Christ  given  the  Church,  to  bind 
men  up  to  more  than  himself  hath  done  ?  or  to  exclude  those  from 


268  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

her  society,  who  may  be  admitted  to  heaven.  Will  Christ  ever 
thank  men,  at  the  great  day,  for  keeping  such  out  from  commu- 
nion with  his  Church,  to  whom  he  will  vouchsafe  (not  only) 
crowns  of  glory ;  but  it  may  be  aureolce,  golden  too,  if  there  be 
any  such  there  ?"  "  The  grand  commission  with  which  the 
Apostles  were  sent  out,  was  only  to  teach  what  Christ  had  com- 
manded them.  Not  the  least  intimation  of  any  power  given 
them  to  impose  anything  beyond  what  he  himself  had  spoken 
to  them,  or  they  were  directed  by  the  immediate  guidance  of  the 
Spirit  of  God,"  "  There  were  diversities  of  practice  and  vari- 
eties of  observances  among  Christians  ;  but  the  Holy  Ghost 
never  thought  those  things  ought  to  be  made  matters  of  laws/' 
*  *  "  The  Apostles  valued  not  indifferences  at  all," 
"and  what  reason  is  there  why  men  should  be  so  strictly  tied  up 
to  such  things,  which  they  may  do,  or  let  alone,  and  yet  be  very 
good  Christians  still  ?"  *  •*  *  "  Without  all  controversy,  the 
main  inlet  of  all  the  distractions,  confusions,  and  divisions  of  the 
Christian  world,  hath  been  by  adding  other  conditions  of  Church 
communion  than  Christ  hath  done."  *  *  *  "  Would  there 
even  be  less  peace  and  unity  in  a  Church,  if  a  diversity  were 
allowed  as  to  practices  supposed  indifferent?  Yea,  there  would 
be  so  much  more  as  there  was  a  mutual  forbearance  and  conde- 
scension as  to  such  things.  The  unity  of  a  Church  is  a  unity 
of  love,  and  of  doctrine,  not  a  BARE  UNIFORMITY  of  practice ,  or  of 
opinion" 

The  remarks  of  Owen  on  this  question  are  also  in  point. 
"  Teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  com- 
manded you — Havro  oaa.  The  commission  goes  no  further. 
Let  the  Liturgy  be  tried  by  this  rule  ;  and  I  cannot  but  admire, 
with  what  peace  and  satisfaction  to  their  own  souls,  men  can 
pretend  to  act  as  by  commission  from  Christ,  as  the  chief  adminis- 
trators of  his  government  and  worship  on  earth,  and  make  it 
their  whole  business  almost,  TO  TEACH  MEN  TO  DO  AND  OBSERVE 
WHAT  HE  NEVER  COMMANDED;  and  rigorously  to  inquire  after 
and  into  their  own  commands,  whilst  those  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
are  openly  neglected." 

But  it  is  alleged  that  the  Scripture  says  "  Let  all  things  be 
done  decently  and  in  order"  This  only  forbids  things  disorderly 
and  indecent  in  the  worship  of  God.  Within  the  wide  range  of 
what  is  orderly  and  decent,  it  leaves  people  entirely  free.  It  can 
give  no  authority  to  impose  a  Liturgy,  till  it  is  first  decided  that 
to  worship  God  without  a  Liturgy  is'  disorderly  and  indecent, 
and  subversive  of  the  ends  of  worship.  The  remarks  o.f  John 
Cotton  on  this  point  are  to  the  point  and  conclusive.  "  Suppose 
the  Church  of  Corinth  (or  any  other  Church  or  Synod)  should 
enjoin  upon  their  ministers  to  preach  in  a  gown.  A  gown  is  a 


ALLEGED    RIGHT    TO    IMPOSE    LITURGIES.  269 

decent  garment  to  preach  in,  yet  such  an  injunction  is  not  ground- 
ed upon  that  text  of  the  Apostle ;  for  then  a  minister  neglecting 
to  preach  in  a  gown  would  neglect  the  commandments  of  the 
Apostle,  which  indeed  he  doth  not.  For  if  he  preach  in  a  cloak 
he  preacheth  decently  enough,  and.  that  is  all  which  the  Apostle's 
canon  reacheth." 

The  DUTY  of  worshipping  God  involves  the  RIGHT  to  worship 
him  according  to  our  own  conscience  and  His  holy  Word.  It 
frees  us  from  all  Liturgies  and  ceremonies  imposed  by  man.  In 
imposing  such  things  by  all  the  penalties  within  her  power,  and 
in  debarring  all  who  will  not  use  these  Liturgies  and  ceremo- 
nies, from  the  common  privileges  of  Christianity,  the  Episcopal 
Church,  as  well  as  the  Roman,  while  she  claims  to  be  exclusively 
"  THE  CHURCH,''  is,  according  to  her  ability,  a  great  persecutor 
and  a  schismatic.  She  has  usurped  Christ's  prerogatives,  and 
his  people's  rights ;  she  hinders  and  forbids  Christ's  people 
from  a  free  and  conscientious  discharge  of  the  duties  required  of 
them.  If  they  will  not  submit  to  her  usurpations,  she  will,  as 
much  as  in  her  lies,  debar  them  from  all  Church. privileges  and 
ordinances,  and  deny  them  all  participation  in  the  public  worship 
of  God. 

Ought  there  to  be  a  doubt  that  this  part  of  her  settled  policy 
and  law,  is  a  criminal  usurpation,  which  no  Christian  should 
either  submit  to  or  abet — -a  course  of  policy  and  law,  which  that 
Church  is  bound  forthwith  to  reform,  and  for  whose  past 
enormities  she  ought  to  humble  herself  in  deep  repentance  1  To 
deny  men  their  civil  rights  is  something ;  to  plunder  men  of  their 
property  by  highway  robbery  is  something;  but  to  usurp  the  rights 
of  conscience  in  the  matter  of  worshipping  God,  and  in  such  a 
matter  to  "frame  iniquity  by  law,"  is  an  outrage  which  ought 
no  longer  to  be  perpetrated  by  anything  that  claims  to  be  The 
Church  of  Christ. 


XX, 


ON  SCHISM. 

Examination  of  the  grounds  on  which  the  Puritan  Churches  are  charged 
as  schismatical.  The  Prelatical  Doctrine  of  Schism  tested  by  Scrip- 
ture. Singular  scheme  for  restoring  a  visible  Unity.  Scriptural  view  of 
Schism. 

A  GREAT  outcry  is  made  about  the  SIN  OF  SCHISM.  Our  Puri- 
tan Fathers,  and  all  who  worship  God,  save  in  the  forms  and 
under  the  authority  of  Prelacy,  are  denounced  as  SCHISMATICS. 

The  grounds  on  which  these  charges  are  made,  are  various — 
our  accusers  not  appearing  to  have  well  digested  the  principles  on 
which  they  would  determine  in  what  the  sin  consists  ;  and,  for 
that  reason,  laying  down  now  one  basis,  and  now  another ;  con- 
sistent with  themselves  in  nothing,  save  that  in  all  shifting  and 
changes,  they  keep  still  upon  ground  which  would  hand  over 
the  whole  Christian  world  to  despotism  and  darkness. 

What  is  that  guilty  schism  which  is  charged  upon  us  ?  If  you 
inquire  of  the  books  and  missals  in  which  that  charge  is  so  cur- 
rently made,  you  will  find  its  essence  to  consist  in  one  of  these 
three  particulars : 

1.  The  breaking1  away  of  any  body  of  Christians  from  the 
customs,  or  rule,  of  the  Catholic,  or  Universal  Church : 

2.  Worshiping1'  God  in  public,  or  socially,  without  conformity  to 
the  Liturgy,  or  rituals  of  the  National  Church :  or, 

3.  Departing- from  the  authority  of  the  Diocesan  Bishop  of  the 
particular  territory :  or  in  not  maintaining  communion  with,  and 
subjection  to,  some  Prelate  of  the  Apostolical  succession. 

With  regard  to  the  FIRST  of  these  grounds,  we  answer  (1.)  That 
if  Schism  consists  in  breaking  away  from  the  AUTHORITY  of  the  so 
called  Universal  or  Catholic  Church — viz.  the  authority  of  a 
Catholic  organization,  having  an  earthly  head,  or  bearing  earthly 
rule  over  all  Christians  ;  then  neither  we  nor  our  Episcopal  breth- 
ren recognize  any  such  organization  or  authority.  The  New 
Testament  knows  nothing  of  it  Nobody  claims  it,  save  Anti- 
christ 


ON  SCHISM.  271 

(2.)  If  Schism  consists  in  want  of  conformity  to  the  customs — 
liturgies,  ceremonies,  observances — of  the  UNIVERSAL  CHURCH  ; 
then  we  answer  that  there  are  no  such  universal  customs 
from  which  we  have  broken  away.  The  liturgy  of  those  who 
particularly  make  the  charge  upon  us,  differs  from  every  other 
liturgy  on  earth,  and  from  that  of  any  other  Church  that  ever  ex- 
isted. Its  ceremonials  do  the  same.  Its  doctrines  differ  funda- 
mentally from  those  of  the  Roman,  and  Greek,  and  Armenian 
Churches.  Between  its  written  prayers  and  our  extempore 
prayers,  and  worship,  there  is,  in  the  main,  a  happy  agreement,  in 
spirit  and  substance  ;  while  the  difference  between  both  and 
many  of  those  of  Rome,  is  heaven-wide.  But  we  are  not 
bound  at  all  to  inquire  what  are  the  customs,  ceremonies,  liturgies, 
or  doctrines  of  the  Universal  Church  :  but  only  what  is  required 
in  the  Word  of  God.  It  is  no  schism  for  any  congregation  of 
Christians,  to  cast  off  entirely  all  forms,  and  doctrines,  and  ordi- 
nances, which  rest  merely  in  the  "  commandments  of  men." 
In  so  doing,  they  break  none  of  Christ's  laws,  and  infringe  not 
upon  any  of  his  people's  rights.  It  is  no  schism,  no  breach  of 
fellowship,  or  of  charity.  They  who  take  offence  at  this ;  who 
deny  these  franchises ;  who  would  impose  human  rituals  and 
ordinances ;  and  then  denounce  and  punish  those  as  schismatics 
who  do  not  obey^-they  are  the  schismatics. 

What  is  true  of  all  congregations  of  Christ's  people  every- 
where, is  more  apparently  and  undeniably  so  in  ours.  Our  Fa- 
thers came — acknowledged  members  of  Christ's  Church,  and  their 
ministers  acknowledged  as  lawfully  ordained  ministers — into  a 
wilderness,  three  thousand  miles  away  from  any  part  of  Christ's 
Church,  that  could  even  pretend  to  any  jurisdiction  over  them. 
They  took  Christ's  word:  and  whatever  He  ordained,  that  they 
acknowledged.  Whatever  ceremonies  and  ordinances  were 
simply  of  man's  invention,  those  they  threw  entirely  aside.  Was 
it  schism  to  do  so  ?  And  now  there  come  men  into  the  midst  of 
these  Churches,  and  call  us  dissenters  and  schismatics  !  They 
say  it  is  a  heinous  sin  for  any  Christian  to  worship  with  us  !*  that 
our  Churches  are  no  Churches !  that  our  ministers  are  followers 
of  Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram  !  and  that  none  who  hold  with 
us,  have  any  part  in  the  covenanted  mercies  of  God ! 

But  if  our  Fathers  were  bound  to  follow  the  customs  of  the 
Catholic  Church ;  then,  what  customs,  or  the  customs  of  what  part 
of  it,  should  they  have  followed  ?  Those  of  England  ?  Then  the 
emigrants  to  Mexico  and  South  America  must  follow  those  of 

*  See  Chapin's  Reasons  for  not  joining  in  sectarian  worship.  Yet  in  that  work, 
the  author  makes  this  remarkable  concession :  "  If  we"  [Episcopalians]  "  have  no  more 
Scripture  ivarrant  than  other  denominations,  we"  '[Episcopalians]  "ARE  GUILTY  OF 
SCHISM.  They  were  here  first;  they  are  more  in  numbers  ;  and  if  they  are  equally  right, 
it  is  sin  for  us  to  separate  from  then*.."  P.  16. 


272  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Spain:  the  emigrants  to  Canada  must  follow  those  of  France: 
the  mingled  emigrants  to  these  United  States  of  later  years,  must 
follow  the  customs  of  their  respective  countries  :  and  here  is  a 
beautiful  specimen  of  Unity  in  Catholic  customs!  On  this  ground, 
why  has  England  sent  her  Protestant  Bishops  and  Liturgy  into 
Popish  Ireland  ?  Why  did  she  send  them  to  Popish  Canada  ? 

The  first  alleged  ground  of  schism  is  an  absurdity. 

2.  Does  Schism  consist  in  worshipping  God  publicly  or  so- 
cially, without  conforming  to  the  Liturgy  or  rituals  of  the  NA- 
TIONAL CHURCH  ? 

The  National  Church  ?  Then  what  constitutes  schism  in  these 
United  States  ?  The  National  Church  !  The  authority  of  that 
Church  was  as  valid  under  the  Bloody  Mary  as  in  the  days  of 
Elizabeth  ;  and  Cranmer,  Latimer,  Ridley  and  the  other  English 
martyrs  were  schismatics,  for  not  conforming  themselves  to  the 
canons,  rituals  and  liturgy  of  the  National  Church.  If  such  a 
Church  may  exist  and  have  authority,  then  the  Church  of  Spain 
or  of  France  is  endowed  with  righteous  authority,  equally  with 
that  of  England.  A  National  Church  ?  A  National  organiza- 
tion with  power  to  decree  rites,  liturgies  and  canons  for  a  nation  ! 
Where  is  its  model  or  warrant  in  the  New  Testament  ?  What 
are  its  prerogatives  and  powers  ?  What  are  its  officers  ;  and 
where  in  the  New  Testament  is  the  record  of  their  appointment? 
Where  is  the  charier  of  their  authority  ?  A  National  Church  ! 
There  is  no  such  thing,  having  any  authority  that  a  Christian 
may  acknowledge.  It  is  all  a  usurpation.  It  is  no  schism  to 
regard  such  canons,  traditions,  ceremonies,  and  imposed  liturgies 
as  a  nullity.  No  Schism  ? — Nay,  they  who  submit  to  its  decrees 
are  abettors  of  a  conspiracy  against  the  rights  of  Christ's  people ; 
and  of  treason  against  the  only  Lawgiver  and  Head  of  the  Church. 
They  who  attempt  to  enforce  the  requirements  of  such  a  pre- 
tended Church  upon  Christ's  people,  make  war  upon  the  liber- 
ties and  order  of  Christ's  kingdom.  These  are  they  who  rend 
the  seamless  mantle  of  Christ;  and  who,  in  the  pride  and  arro- 
gance of  assumed  power,  seem  determined  to  rule  or  ruin  the 
Church  of  the  living  God.* 

*  Chapin,  in  his  "  Primitive  Church,"  has  a  chapter  entitled  "  THE  ENGLISH 
REFORMATION  CANONICAL."  It  would  have  been  more  to  the  point  to  show, 
(with  regard  to  the  authority  that  effected  it)  that  it  was  scriptural.  Canonical! 
Queen  Mary  too  made  a  "  Canonical"  reformation  when  she  carried  the  reformation 
back  to  Rome.  "  The  English  Reformation  Canonical !"  The  very  implication  of 
such  a  title  condemns  the  reformation  in  Germany  as  a  wicked  schism.  This  is 
indeed  the  drift  of  his  argument.  So  Dr.  Jarvis,  in  his  late  Tract, "  No  Union 
with  Rome,"  gravely  argues  that  it  was  lawful  for  the  "  British  Church"  to  recover 
her  original  customs  and  privileges."  He  says  he  is  "  prepared,  and  if  proper  encour- 
agement is  given,  he  will  hereafter  proceed  to  show  that  *  **  the  Chur.ch  of  Britain 
was  one  of  those  countries,  which  in  the  language  of  the  Canonists  was  autocepha- 
lous  j  i  e.,  held  in  itself  an  inherent  jurisdiction  independent  of  any  foreign  power." 
"  And  if  such  was  the  fact  it  would  be  absurd  to  maintain  that  the  United  States,  a 


ON  SCHISM.  273 

•  3.  The  third  ground  on  which  we  are  charged  as  schismatics 
is,  that  schism  consists  in  departing  from  the  authority  of  the 
DIOCESAN  BISHOP  OF  THE  PARTICULAR  TERRITORY:  or  in  not 
maintaining  communion  with,  and  subjection  to,  SOME  PRE- 
LATE OF  THE  APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION. 

We  hold  that  the  very  existence  of  a  Diocesan  Bishop  was 
unknown  to  the  original  Church  ;  and  that  his  power  and  office 
is  an  entire  usurpation,  and  that  the  so-called  "  Apostolical  suc- 
cession" is  false  and  Popish  in  principle,  and  false  in  fact. 
These  things  we  shall  endeavor  to  show  in  the  proper  place.  If 
these,  views  are  correct,  then  Diocesan  Bishops  and  their  adherents 
are  the  schismatics  ;  not  those  who  reject  their  usurped  authority. 
But  for  the  present,  let  us  examine  the  prelatical  doctrine  of 
schism  upon  its  own  grounds.  The  principle  which  now  comes 
into  question  is,  that  a  departure  from  the  Diocesan  Bishop  is  to 
be  guilty  of  the  sin  of  schism.  Reforms  must  begin  with  the 
Bishop  ;  those  who  do  not  stand  by  the  Bishop  wherever  he 
stands,  and  follow  him  whithersoever  he  goes ; — or  certainly, 
they  who  separate  from  him,  are  wicked  schismatics.  Here  is  the 
doctrine  of  the  Holy  Alliance  over  again :  all  needful  reforms 
must  come  from  the  sovereign — i.  e.  in  this  case,  from  the  lord 
over  God's  heritage.  The  people  have  no  rights  or  duties,  save 
that  of  submission  to  the  Bishop.  On  this  principle  the  Wiek- 
liffites,  the  Hussites,  the  Albigenses,  and  Waldenses  were 
wicked  schismatics  :  Luther  was  but  a  wicked  schismatic — de- 
parting from  his  Bishop,  and  even  calling  in  question  his  very 

country  not  known  when  the  Patriarchate  of  the  West  was- conceded  to  the  Bishop 
of  Rome,  and  colonized  by  Britain  after  she  had  recovered  her  independence,  can, 
of  right,  become  a  dependent  on  the  Roman  see." 

What  an  exhibition  of  folly  and  superstition !  Does  the  right  of  the  British 
Church  to  reform  itself,  depend  upon  what  records  Dr.  Jarvis  or  some  other  man  may 
dig  up  from  dust  and  worms,  to  prove  that  Britain  was  originally  autocephalous  ? 
Will  Dr.  Jarvis  join  in  that  issue  with  Rome  ?  And  if  the  proof  fails,  will  he  concede  a 
right  to  Rome  once  more  to-  sway  the  sceptre  over  England  ?  Is  this  the  last  hope  of 
warding  off  from  these  United  States  the  calamity  of  being  conceded  "o/ngto"  a 
dependency  of  the  Roman  see  ?  Why,  to  enter  at  all  upon  this  argument,  is  to  CON- 
CEDE, that  all  countries  which  began  their  Christian  career  under  the  auspices  of 
Rome,  must  for  ever  remain  under  her  dominion.  Dr.  Jarvis  is  "prepared"  and  if 
'•  suitable  encouragement  is  given,"  he  "  will  proceed  to  show" — what  ?  Why,  this 
forsooth ; — he  will  show  by  learned  researches  in  history  about  the  Patriarchate  of  the 
West,  and  its  date; — by  documentary  proofs — so  voluminous,  that  encouragement  is 
needed  to  pay  the  printer  ! — that  these  United  States  are  not  "  of  right"  a  dependency 
of  "  the  Roman  see  !" 

But  let  not  the  good  Protestants  of  the  United  States  be  alarmed.  The  ques- 
tion is  only  between  the  Protestant  Prelates  and  the  Papist,  as  to  which  has 
the  exclusive  right  to  lord  it  over  this  domain.  When  they  are  through  with  their 
documentary  proofs,  and  with  their  "endless  genealogies"  of  "  the  succession;" — 
whether  England  was  ever  Autocephalous  or  not,  we  apprehend  that  either  party,  if  vic- 
torious, will  have  to  enter  upon  another  argument  with  the  PEOPLE.  We  do  not  by 
any  means  concede,  that  if  Protestant  prelates  do  not  rule  us,  the  Popish  must.  We 
care  not  at  all  how  that  dispute,  about  the  autocephalousness  of  England,  is  decided 
between  Dr.  Jarvis  and  the  Pope. 

18 


274  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

authority.  The  disciples  of  Christ  who  perished  in  the  dun- 
geons of  the  Inquisition,  were  schismatics ;  those  who  met  in  secret 
to  worship  God  under  the  reign  of  Bloody  Mary,  were  wicked 
schismatics ;  and  the  same  was  true  of  all  the  martyrs  who  perished 
at  the  stake.  This  principle  delivers  the  world  over  to  a  despotism 
as  dark  and  hopeless  as  any  under  which  human  nature  ever  groan- 
ed. A  reformation  under  such  a  principle  is  a  hopeless  impossibil- 
ity. Never,  in  the  history  of  the  world,  did  a  reformation  begin 
with  prelatical  bishops  :  Never.  The  reformation  had  struggled  in 
England  among  the  common  people,  from  the  days  of  Wickliffe.* 
From  the  midst  of  persecutions  and  dungeons,  the  light  fled 
from  England  to  the  continent ;  and  there  John  Huss  and  Je- 
rome of  Prague  had  suffered  burning.  The  remains  of  that 
persecuted  and  crushed  reformation  were  yet  lingering  in  Eng- 
land, when  the  light  once  more  broke  in  from  Saxony.  Even 
then,  it  was  not  the  canonical  movement  of  the  Bishops  that  com- 
menced and  carried  on  the  Reformation  ;  but  God  overruled  the 
lust  and  wickedness  of  one  of  the  vilest  monsters  that  ever  filled 

*  It  was  on  the  ground  that  the  English  people  kept  with  the  Bishops,  that  Mr.  Cha- 
pin  styles  the  English  Reformation  canonical.  On  the  same  ground,  Bishop  Brow- 
nell  declares  in  his  charge,  how  happy  it  would  have  been,  "  When  the  Dignitaries 
of  the  Continental  Churches  refused  to  unite  in  the  Holy  work  of  the  Reformation  *  * 
*  *  if  a  continuance  of  the  ministerial  succession  had  been  sought  from  the  English 
Church;"  at  all  events,  they  should  have  had  the  grace  to  keep  by  some  Bishop. 
Would  that  have  been  canonical  ?  Bishop  Brownell,  here,  would  allow  private  judg- 
ment to  determine  upon  the  orthodoxy  of  the  Bishops ;  when  he  will  not  trust  pri- 
vate judgment  with  the  Word  of  God !  He  here  admits  the  right  of  the  people,  in 
one  diocese,  to  renounce  their  own  Bishop,  and  attach  themselves  to  another ;  and 
that  on  the  ground  of  their  own  private  judgment.  Is  that  canonical;  or  is  it 
schism  ?  The  principles  of  Bishop  Brownell,  and  of  Mr.  Chapin,  would  not  fail, 
on  their  own  principles,  to  fill  the  "  Catholic  Church"  with  confusion  and  divi- 
sions without  end.  Besides,  that  principle  is  heresy  on  their  own  ground  ;  being 
condemned  by  the  fathers,  and  that  too,  by  one  of  the  first  two  centuries :  as  we  shall 
presently  see. 

There  is  a  further  inquiry  with  regard  to  this  "  Canonical  Reformation."  Is  it 
canonical  for  the-  civil  power  to  depose  one  set  of  Bishops,  and  to  set  up  others  ? 
Our  Canonists  may  take  which  horn  of  the  dilemma  they  will.  The  deprivation 
of  the  Popish  Bishops  under  Queen  Elizabeth  was  either  lawful  or  unlawful. 
At  that  time,  Bishop  Kitchen  alone  consented  to  the  Reformation  ;  and  all  others 
were  deposed.  If  their  deprivation  was  lawful ;  then  any  apostolical  acts  which 
these  Popish  Bishops  might  afterwards  perform  in  England,  were  null  and  void. 
The  priests  whom  they  should  ordain,  would  be  no  priests  ;  and  their  acts  a  nullity. 
Also,  if  the  deprivation  of  these  Bishops  was  lawful,  then  was  the  deprivation  of 
the  Protestant  Bishops,  in  the  time  of  Queen  Mary,  also  lawful — being  performed  in, 
the  same  way,  and  by  the  same  authority.  If  so,  then  the  consecration  of  Arch- 
bishop Parker  by  these  deprived  Bishops  (Coverdale,  the  only  "  conducting"  link, 
was  never  restored)  was  unlawful;  and  all  the  present  ordinations  of  England  and 
of  the  United  States  are  unlawful,  and  null,  and  void  !  This  is  one  horn  of  the  di- 
lemma. But  if  the  deprivation  of  the  Popish  Bishops  by  Queen  Elizabeth  was 
unlawful ;  then  the  Reformation  was  not  canonical,  but  a  wicked  schism  !  The 
ordination  of  Archbishop  Parker,  by  deprived  Bishops,  was  unlawful,  and  all  the 
ordinations  of  the  usurping  Bishops,  and  of  all  that  follow  them  down  through 
time,  are  unlawful  and  null,  and  void.  On  their  own  ground,  our  High  Church 
Episcopalians  are  cut  off  from  "the  covenanted  mercy  of  God  ;"  their  first  duty, 
and  their  only  hope  is,  to  make  the  best  of  their  way  back  to  Rome. 


ON  SCHISM.  275 

a  throne,  to  break  through  all  canons  ;  and  to  chain  the  prelates 
to  his  revolutionary  car.  It  was  the  throne  and  the  Parliament 
that  finally  unthrottled  the  hands  of  the  prelates  from  the  neck 
of  truth  and  freedom  gasping  for  life  ; — that  deposed  some,  and 
set  up  others;  and  in  a  way  contrary  to  all  canons,  carried  on  the 
Reformation  by  the  weight  of  the  civil  arm.  Had  any  of  the 
crowned  heads  on  the  continent  been  laid  under  similar  induce- 
ments, there  might  have  been  reforming  Bishops  on  the  continent ; 
provided  those  sovereigns  had  wielded  the  sceptre  with  as  vigor- 
ous a  hand  as  the  English  Henry.  Otherwise,  like  kings  and  em- 
perors before  them,  they  might  have  been  glad  to  wait  before  the 
gates  of  the  sovereign  Pontiff,  barefoot,  and  in  a  shirt  of  hair, 
through  a  winter's  night,  glad  to  be  admitted  to  kiss  his  toe  in  the 
morning.  A  Reformation  canonical,  in  the  sense  of  waiting  for 
the  Bishops,  and  of  not  moving  without  them.  Never.  Human 
nature  is  too  fond  of  power ;  and  the  possession  of  such  unearth- 
ly power  is  too  corrupting  for  a  reformation  ever  to  begin  with 
Prelates.  And  yet  it  is  schism  to  depart  from  Diocesan  Bishops  ! 
Thus  Bishop  Hobart,  in  his  "  Companion  for  the  Altar,"  says, 
"  Let  it  be  thy  supreme  care,  O  my  soul,  to  receive  the  blessed 
sacrament  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour,  only  from  the 
hands  of  those  who  derive  their  authority  by  regular  transmission 
from  Christ."  *  *  *  "  Where  the  Gospel  is  proclaimed,  com- 
munion with  the  Church  by  the  participation  of  its  ordinances 
at  the  hands  of  the  duly  authorized  priesthood  is  THE  INDISPEN- 
SABLE CONDITION  OF  SALVATION."* 

Now  were  it  not  that  the  Fathers  of  the  second  and  third  cen- 
turies speak  of  parish  Bishops  and  not  of  Diocesans,  this  dogma 
might  be  substantiated  from  the  Fathers  ;  though,  as  we  shall  see, 
it  is  contrary  to  the  Bible.  Thus  :  Irenoeus  says,  "  Wheresoever 
the  Bishop  shall  appear,  there  also  let  the  people  be"  That  is, 
if  this  can  apply  to  Diocesans — let  the  people  be  with  Bonner 
when  he  is  bishop  :  when  Latimer  is  in  the  chair,  let  them  go 
with  Latimer ;  at  another  time,  let  them  go  with  Laud.  Let 
them  believe  one  Gospel  with  Bishop  Mcllvaine,  and  another 
Gospel  with  Bishop  Doane  and  the  Pope.  The  same  Father  says, 
*'  See  that  ye  follow  your  Bishop,  even  as  God  the  Father"  Ig- 
natius says,  "  We  ought  to  look  upon  the  Bishop  as  we  would  look 

*  The  Bishop  afterwards  attempted  to  extricate  himself  from  this  position,  by 
saying  thatbjr  ''indispensable  condition"  he  did  not  mean  that  God  might  not  dis- 
pense with  it  in  cases  of  "ignorance,  invincible  prejudice,  imperfect  reasoning,  &c., 
—but  that  man  might  not  dispense  with  it."  What  is  this  but  preaching  to  every 
man,  Episcopacy  or  Perdition  ?  you  may  not  dispense  with  Episcopacy,  and  have  any 
warrant  on  Gospel  grounds— or  offers,— that  you  shall  be  saved.  Rev.  Mr.  Bristed, 
a  thorough  Episcopalian,  but  a  Low  Churchman,  makes  this  just  remark.  "The 
doctrine  of  High  Churchmen  is,  that  all  Non-Episcopalians  are  in  the  broad  road 
to  perdition  ;  their  watchword  is,  Episcopacy  or  damnation  *  *  *  as  if  such 
a  dogma  were  not  the  very  essence  of  Popery." 


276  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

upon  the  Lord  himself;"  and  again, — "  subject  to  your  Bishop 
as  to  the  command  of  God;"  and  again, — "  Hearken  unto  the 
Bishop,  that  God  may  hearken  unto  you.  My  soul  be  security  for 
them  that  submit  to  their  Bishop"  The  Oxford  Tractarians 
add  their  testimony  on  this  point,  thus:  Tract  No.  5.  "  The 
Bishop  is  the  shepherd  of  our  souls  while  Christ  is  away ;"  and 
Tract  No.  10.  "  Be  as  sure  that  the  Bishop  is  Christ's  appointed 
REPRESENTATIVE,  as  if  we  actually  saw  upon  his  head  a  cloven 
tongue  like  as  of  fire  :"  and  again  ;  "  The  Bishop  rules  the  whole 
Church  here  below,  as  Christ  rules  it  above  :"  and  again  ;  "  Christ 
the  true  mediator  above;  the  Bishop  his  earthly  likeness" 

Such  is  the  doctrine  of  Prelacy  ;  but  hear  the  doctrine  of  the 
Bible.  It  was  a  true  Apostle,  and  no  pretended  successor,  who 
said,  "  Be  ye  followers  of  me,  EVEN  AS  I  AM  OF  CHRIST."  No 
further  than  this  must  we  follow  even  an  Apostle ;  no,  nor  even 
an  angel.  "  Though  WE  or  an  ANGEL  FROM  HEAVEN  PREACH 
ANY  OTHER  GOSPEL  UNTO  YOU  than  that  which  we  have  preached 
unto  you,  let  him  be  accursed.  As  we  said  before,  so  say  I  now 
again  ;  If  ANY  MAN  preach  any  other  Gospel  unto  you  than  that 
ye  have  received,  let  him  be  accursed ;"  no  matter  what  his  suc- 
cessional  pedigree;  no  matter  what  his  office;  if  you  leave 
Christ's  Gospel  to  follow  such  a  Bishop,  you  leave  Christ,  and 
are  a  traitor  to  his  truth  and  kingdom.  Even  though  the 
authority  of  a  Bishop  were  ever  so  lawful,  it  is  as  it  was  in  the 
case  of  the  traitor  Benedict  Arnold,  in  the  days  of  the  American 
Revolution  ;  his  office  was  valid,  his  officers  and  soldiers  owed 
him  a  military  obedience,  but  the  moment  they  discovered  his 
treason  against  the  supreme  power  which  gave  him  his  commis- 
sion, that  moment  they  were  bound  to  leave  him.  To  follow  him 
then  would  make  them  partakers  of  his  treason. 

The  prelatical  doctrine  of  schism  turns  away  from  the  great 
principles  and  design  of  Christianity,  or  rather  it  lays  Christianity 
itself  on  the  allar  a  sacrifice  to  Prelacy.  It  makes  an  outward 
organization  the  main  end  of  religion  ;  it  sacrifices  God's  truth, 
and  human  freedom,  and  conscience,  to  the  great  end  of  exalting 
the  hierarchy.  It  makes  Christ's  kingdom  emphatically  of  this 
world.  It  puts  Christ's  laws  and  people  beneath  the  feet  of  the. 
Prelates.  In  one  word,  it  is  Anti-Christian  ;  a  part  of  the  "  mys- 
tery of  iniquity  ;"  one  of  the  main  foundations  of  him  "  who  sit- 
teth  in  the  temple  of  God,  showing  himself,  that  he  is  God." 

It  affords  an  instructive  lesson  concerning  the  miserable  nature 
of  this  prelatical  notion  of  schism,  to  observe  the  plan  gravely 
marked  out  by  the  present  Bishop  of  Vermont,  for  the  restoration 
of  Unity  in  the  Church.  "  O,  my  brethren,"  says  he  (p.  o03), 
"  how  often  have  I  thought  of  this  question,  until  my  heart  has 
yearned  over  the  miseries  of  sectarian  division  ;  and  I  have  felt 


ON    SCHISM.  277 

as  if  my  life  would  be  a  cheap  sacrifice  for  the  Unity  of  Zion" 
*  *  "  How  often  have  1  dwelt  upon  the  MODE  in  which  ALONE 
it  seemed  to  my  mind,  that  such  a  result  could  be  accomplished, 
until  1  almost  imagined  that  the  time  had  come." 

And  what  is  that  "  mode"  that  "  only"  mode,  "  in  which  alone" 
this  unity  can  be  effected  ?  Hear  Bishop  Hopkins'  plan  :  "At 
length  the  favored  hour  is  come,  and  lo  !  a  general  cry  is  heard,  for 
a  UNIVERSAL  COUNCIL."  He  would  have  it  held  on  our 
free  soil;  in  Philadelphia,  the  city  of  brotherly  love.  "  Rome 
hears,  and  responds  to  the  appeal."  *  *  "  Her  hierarchy  all 
consent  to  the  proposed  pacification,  and  appoint  their  delegates  ; 
men  unsurpassed  in  varied  learning,  and  renowned  for  dialectic 
skill."  "Greece  gladly  unites"  "Protestant  Germany" — yes ! 
Protestant  Germany ;  Transcendentalists,  Neologists — men  de- 
nying the  Lord  that  bought  them  :  denying  the  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  very  personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost — even 
these  the  Bishop  greets,  as  they  enter  the  precincts  of  the  Univer- 
sal Council !  And  England  ?  "  England,  tlie  friend  of  toleration; 
and  now,  more  than  ever,  feeling'  the  absolute  necessity  of  religious 
unity :  England,  chafed  and  irritated  by  the  demons  of  sectarian 
zeal;  once  revolutionized  by  the  fury  of  fanaticism,  and  now  bleed- 
ing under  the  lash  of  civil  discord,  * .  .-*  *  England  hails  the 
summons,  and  joyfully  yields  her  treasures  to  the  work  which  pro- 
mises to  make  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  one  again" 

England  the  friend  of  toleration  !  Shades  of  Bishop  Bonner 
and  Archbishop  Laud!  England,  "chafed  by  the  demons  of 
sectarian  zeal  ?"  Marvellously  conciliatory  to  the  children  of 
them  who  suffered  imprisonment,  banishment  or  death,  for  free- 
dom to  worship  God  !  But  let  that  pass! 

The  Grand  Council  is  assembled.  Papists,  Neologists,  Prela- 
tists  :  all  are  there.  But  for  the  Dissenters — the  Puritans,  the 
Methodists,  the  Baptists — the  good  Bishop  gives  them  no  sum- 
mons. It  might  not  be  agreeable  to  the  company  invited,  to 
summon  any  that  are  not  of  the  "  Catholic  Church."  The  Coun- 
cil is  assembled.  And  now  for  the  basis  on  which  to  agree :  WHAT 
is  THE  RULE  AND  JUDGE  OF  FAITH  ? 

In  another  publication,  Bishop  Hopkins  has  stood  for  the  Bible 
alone :  but  now,  in  the  Universal  Council,  he  will  give  up  that 
principle  for  the  sake  of  Union  with  Romanists.  On  what  Rule 
of  Faith  he  would  agree  with  the  German  Neologists,  who  deny 
both  inspiration  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  does  not  appear.  But 
hear  the  Bishop  in  his  own  words  (p.  306),  "  And  now  the  prin- 
ciple is  to  be  settled,  which  shall  guide  the  deliberations  of  this 
august  body.  And,  thank  God,  there  can  be  no  serious  difficulty 
in  the  search ;  for  the  principles  avowed  by  the  Church  of  Rome 
may  be  made  to  quadrate  sufficiently  with  the  principles  of  the  Re- 


278  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

formation,  when  the  minds  of  Christians  are  governed  by  the 
pure  desire  of  truth  and  of  unity.  THE  BIBLE  AND  APOSTOLICAL 
TRADITION,  are  the  standards  to  which  the  Church  of  Rome  has 
always  professed  to  appeal ;  and  she  consents  to  try  her  apostoli- 
cal traditions  by  the  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  FATHERS."  *  *  * 
"  The  Word  of  God,  therefore,  AND  THE  WRITINGS  OF  THE  FATHERS, 
being'  in  fact  the  only  authorities  to  which  the  great  divisions  of  the 
Christian  world  ever  have  appealed,  TO  THESE  THE  AP- 
PEAL MUST  NOW  BE  MADE."  Alas,  alas!  Bishop  Hop. 
kins  will  now  trust  a  Council  of  Papists,  Greeks,  High  Church- 
men and  Neologists,  to  settle  authoritatively  the  faith  of  the  world, 
on  the  basis  of  Scripture  and  tradition,  interpreted  by  the  Fathers  ! 
And  that  with  the  express  understanding,  that  "  The  principles 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  may  be  made  to  quadrate  sufficiently 
with  the  principles  of  the  Reformation!"  "  And  now"  he  says, 
"  behold  the  work  is  done :  the  trumpet  of  the  Christian  Jubilee  is 
blown  throughout  the  earth" 

Yes ;  a  Holy  Alliance  to  dethrone  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
to  give  his  seat  and  sceptre  into  the  hands  of  a  human  hierarchy  ! 
A  Holy  Alliance  to  throw  down  the  Bible  from  the  altar  of  God, 
and  to  exalt  a  mingled  creed,  the  fruit  of  an  incestuous  compro- 
mise between  truth  and  falsehood !  This  is  to  give  peace  to 
Zion  !  This  is  to  bind  Christians  in  uniformity !  Just  as 
if  when  men  cannot  be  made  to  agree  by  the  clear  truth  and 
authority  of  God,  they  can  be  made  to  agree  by  the  wisdom 
and  mandates  of  such  a  mongrel  assembly, — ycleped  a  "  Uni- 
versal Council." 

We  can  point  Bishop  Hopkins  to  a  shorter,  surer,  safer  way 
to  Christian  unity.  Bind  each  congregation  and  each  Christian 
to  God's  Word  and  to  Christ's  commandments  alone.  The  ordi- 
nances and  commandments  of  men,  throw  them  all  aside. 
Leave  each  congregation,  and  each  Christian,  to  go  to  his  Bible 
for  himself.  Whatever  congregations  hold  the  essentials  of 
Christianity,  and  conscientiously  observe  Christ's  ordinances  ; 
hold  them  as  true  Churches ;  call  them  not  sectarians  or  schis- 
matics ;  no,  nor  dissenters.  Lift  everywhere  the  standard  of 
mutual  respect  and  love,  emblazoned  with  these  sentences  of 
Divine  truth:  "  LET  EVERY  MAN  BE  FULLY  PERSUADED  IN  HIS 

OWN  MIND."  "  WHO  ART  THOU  THAT  JUDGEST  ANOTHER  MAN*S 
SERVANT."  "WHY  DOST  THOU  JUDGE  THY  BROTHER?  OR  WHY 
DOST  THOU  SET  AT  NAUGHT  THY  BROTHER?"  "NOT  AS  LORDS 
OVER  GOD'S  HERITAGE  BUT  AS  ENSAMPLES  TO  THE  FLOCK."  ThlS 

done,  blow  the  trumpet  of  Jubilee  as  loud  and  as  long  as 
you  please.  If  not  uniformity,  there  is  essential  unity ;  all  that 
Christ  has  made  provision  for,  or  required.  Uniformity,  he  has 
forbidden  any  man,  or  any  Church  to  require.  "  Let  not  him 


ON    SCHISM.  279 

that  eateth,  despise  him  that  eateth  not :  and  let  not  Mm  which 
eateth  not,  judge  him  that  eateth ;  for  God  hath  received  him.11 
"  Let  us  not,  therefore,  judge  one  another  any  more ;  but  judge 
this,  that  no  man  put  a  stumbling-block,  or  an  occasion  to  fall,  in 
his  brother's  way"* 

It  is  time  to  turn  from  these  notions  of  schism,  so  absurd  in 
themselves,  and  so  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  least  shadow  of 
Christian  liberty,  to  the  IDEA  OF  SCHISM  SET  FORTH  IN  THE 
WORD  OF  GOD. 

We  shall  find  there,  no  allusion  to  such  thing  as  schism, 
consisting  in  breaking  away  from  the  domination  of  Popes, 
Councils,  Prelates,  or  of  the  "Catholic"  Church.  The  Word 
of  God  charges  no  schism  upon  those  who  follow  simply  the 
ordinances  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  reject  the  mere  ordi- 
nances and  commandments  of  men.  It  does  not  forbid  us  to 
separate  from  false  teachers,  whatever  be  their  official  character ; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  requires  us  to  reject  such  a  teacher,  though 
he  were  an  Apostle  or  an  Angel  from  Heaven.  The  Schism 
of  which  the  New  Testament  speaks,  is  internal  dissension,  within 
the  bosom  of  the  same  Church.  Thus,  Rom.  xvi.  17,  "Now  I  beseech 
you,  brethren,  mark  those  which  cause  divisions  "  (tf^oaratna?) 
"  CONTRARY  TO  THE  DOCTRINE  which  ye  have  heard,  and  AVOID 
THEM."  Is  it  schism,  then,  to  "  avoid "  a  bishop  who  teaches 
another  Gospel  contrary  to  the  DOCTRINE  that  we  have  heard? 
Again,  1  Cor.  i.  11,  "  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  the  name  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  there  be  no  DIVISIONS  "  (o^to-^ara, 
schisms)  "  among  you;  but  that  ye  be  perfectly  joined  together  IN 

*  The  English  Reformers,  while  they  greatly  erred  in  requiring  uniformity  at 
home,  nevertheless,  acted  on  these  principles  with  regard  to  Christians  abroad. 
Mr.  Chapin,  in  his  Primitive  Church,  with  his  usual  assurance,  says,  "  The  Episco- 
pal Church  has  never  renounced  the  divine  institution  of  Episcopacy,  nor  has  she 
ever  acknowledged  the  orders  of  any  one  who  had  not  been  Episcopaily  ordained." 
I  have  before  shown  that  the  English  Reformers  did  not  believe  in  the  divine  in- 
stitution of  Episcopacy ;  and  it  is  notorious  that  they  uniformly  treated  the  non- 
Episcopal  foreign  Churches  and  ministers  as  true  Churches  and  true  ministers. 
Bishop  Burnet,  whose  authority  on  this  point  is  unquestionable,  says,  "  Whatever 
some  hotter  spirits  have  thought  of  this  since  that  time,  yet  we  are  very  sure  that 
not.  only  those  who  penned  the  Articles,  but  the  body  of  this  Church  for  about  half 
an  age  after,  did  *  *  acknowledge  the  foreign  Churches  so  constituted,  to  be 
true  Churches  as  to  all  the  essentials  of  a  Church,"  CHILLING  WORTH  denies  that 
Luther  and  the  other  Reformers  were  schismatics  for  leaving  Rome  ;  and  maintains 
that  they  were  "a  part  of  the  Church,  and  still  continued  so;  and  therefore  could 
no  more  separate  from  the  whole  than  from  themselves.'1  Even  HOOKER  (Book 
5,  §  68)  says,  "  The  Church  is  a  name  which  art  has  given  to  the  professors  of  the  true 
religion.  *  *  We  find  that  accordingly  the  Apostles  do  everywhere  distinguish  the 
Church  from  Infidels  and  Jews ;  accounting  THEM  WHICH  CALL  UPON  THE  NAME  OF 
OUR  LORD  JESUS  CHRIST,  TO  BE  HIS  CHURCH  ;"  and  any  other  essential  thing 
put  into  the  definition  of  the  Church,  Hooker  maintains  to  be  wrong.  He  express- 
ly says  (Book  7,  §14)  that  "There  may  be  sometimes  very  just  and  sufficient 
reasons  to  allow  ordination  without  a  Bishop.  *  *  And  therefore  we  are  not  simply, 
without  exception,  to  urge  a  lineal  descent  *  *  by  continued  succession  of  Bishops 
in  every  effectual  ordination." 


280  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

THE  SAME  MIND,  and  IN  THE  SAME  JUDGMENT  ;  for  it  hath  been  de- 
clared unto  me  of  you,  my  brethren,  by  them  which  are  of  the 
house  of  Chloe,  that  there  are  CONTENTIONS  among  you."  Is  there 
no  schism  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  because  they  all  bow  to  the 
authority  of  bishops,  all  use  the  Liturgy,  and  all  the  priests  wear 
gowns  and  surplices ;  while,  nevertheless,  CONTENTIONS  about 
Puseyism  are  rending  the  very  bowels  of  the  Church,  and  forbid 
them  to  be  "  in  the  same  mind"  and  in  the  "  same  judgment  ?"  In 
like  manner,  in  1  Cor.xii.  25,  it  is  said,  "  That  there  should  be  no 
SCHISM  in  the  body,  BUT  THAT  THE  MEMBERS  SHOULD  HAVE  THE 

SAME  CARE  ONE  FOR  ANOTHER." 

The  prelatical  notion  of  schism  is  unfounded  in  Scripture  :  an 
engine  invented  to  bind  the  consciences  of  men  in  the  chains  of 
despotism ;  to  detach  Christ's  people  from  their  allegiance  to  His 
truth  and  throne,  and  to  bind  them  to  the  usurped  power  of  a 
human  hierarchy.  An  Apostle  of  old  found  occasion  to  speak  of 
some  who  would  burden  Christianity  by  the  addition  of  human 
rites.  "  Who,"  says  he,  "  came  in  privily  to  spy  out  our  liberty 
which  we  have  in  Christ  Jesus ;  THAT  THEY  MIGHT  BRING  us  INTO 
BONDAGE  :  to  whom  we  gave  place  by  subjection,  NO,  NOT  FOR  AN 
HOUR."  How  sad  a  case  the  Apostle  would  have  been  in,  had 
these  imposers  of  human  rituals  turned  round  and  branded  him 
as  a  Schismatic,  because  he  declined  to  wear  the  yoke  which 
they  had  so  kindly  made  for  him! 


XXI 


THE  CHURCH. 

NO  NATIONAL    PROVINCIAL    OR    DIOCESAN    CHURCH    RECOGNIZED    IN 
THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

The  Church  invisible ;  partly  on  earth,  partly  in  heaven.  The  Church 
on  earth,  composed  of  all  Christ's  people,  in  all  communions;  its 
members  known  only  to  God.  The  Church  as  composed  of  visible 
organizations.  No  National,  Provincial,  or  Diocesan  organization  or 
authority,  recognized  in  the  New  Testament.  Slater's  argument  con- 
cerning the  Churches  of  Antioch  and  Jerusalem,  answered  by  Scrip- 
ture. 

THE  New  Testament  uses  the  word  "  Church "  in  several 
senses : 

1.  As  COMPRISING  ALL  THE  PEOPLE  OF  GoD,  IN  ALL  LANDS,  OF  ALL 
AGES,  THOSE  ON  EARTH,  AND  THOSE  IN  HEAVEN.  Thus  I  Eph.  1. 

22,  23,  "  And  gave  him  to  be  head  over  all  things  TO  THE 
CHURCH,  which  is  his  body ;  the  fullness  of  him  that  filleth  all 
in  all."  This  is  that  Universal  or  Catholic  Church,  of  which  it 
is  said,  Eph.  v.  25,  27,  "  As  Christ  loved  the  CHURCH,  and  gave 
himself  for  it,  that  he  might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it  with  the  wash- 
ing of  water  by  the  word  ;  that  he  might  present  it  to  himself  a 
glorious  Church,  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle  or  any  such  thing  ; 
but  that  it  should  be  holy  and  without  blemish."  This  is  that 
Church,  of  which  it  is  said,  Col.  i.  18,  20,  "  And  he  is  the  head 
of  the  BODY,  THE  CHURCH  ;"  *  *  *  "  and  having  made  peace 
through  the  blood  of  his  cross,  by  him  to  reconcile  all  things 
unto  himself ;  by  him  I  say  whether  they  be  THINGS  IN  EARTH 

OR  THINGS  IN   HEAVEN." 

But  this  Catholic  Church,  of  all  times  and  nations,  part  of 
which  is  on  earth  and  part  in  heaven,  is  no  earthly  organization. 
It  is  the  Church  invisible,  whose  members  are  found  in  all  com- 
munions, and  who  are  known  only  to  God.  Not  every  one  in 
any  earthly  communion  belongs  to  this  invisible  Church  ;  no  rites, 
no  sacraments,  no  creeds,  can  distinguish  them  ;  they  are  not  all 
Israel  who  are  of  Israel;  but  "  the  Lord  knoweth  them  that  are 
his." 


282  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

This  universal  and  invisible  Church,  being  no  earthly  organi- 
zation, has  no  earthly  officers. 

2.  There  is  another  sense  in  which  the  word  Church  desig- 
nates CHRIST'S  APPARENT  AND  PROFESSED  PEOPLE  ON  EARTH. 
Thus,  when  Paul  persecuted  the  saints  whether  at  Jerusalem  or 
at  Damascus,  he  said,  "  concerning  zeal,  persecuting  the  Church;" 
i.  e.  the  visible,  professed  disciples  of  Jesus.  It  was  in  this  sense 
that  the  Saviour  used  the  word,  when  he  said,  "  on  this  rock  will 
I  build  my  Church."  This  is  that  "  Church  "  in  which  it  is  said 
that  God  hath  set  "  first  apostles,  secondarily  prophets,  thirdly 
teachers ;  after  that,  miracles ;  then  gifts  of  healings,  helps,  gov- 
ernments, diversities  of  tongues."  This  is  the  Church  which 
has  received  the  covenants  and  the  promises ;  and  to  which 
Jesus,  when  he  ascended  up  on  high,  gave  various  officers  "  for 
the  perfecting  of  the  saints ;  for  the  work  of  the  ministry ;  for  the 
edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ." 

In  this  sense  the  Church  is  visible ;  embracing  all  Christ's  ap- 
parent and  professed  disciples.  It  is  universal.  It  is  one.  But 
it  is  not  one  as  collected  into  one  organized  society.  It  has  not, 
since  the  Apostles,  any  universal  officers,  holding  authority  over 
the  universal  body  ;  and  this  none  have  pretended,  save  in  an 
unmeaning  and  self-contradictory  sense  ;  except  the  adherents 
of  the  Pope. 

The  unity  of  this  Church  is  not  a  unity  of  organization  ;  nor 
unity  in  the  degrees  and  numbers  of  officers  ;  nor  unity  in  forms 
of  worship.  It  consists  in  having  "  one  faith,  one  Lord,  one 
baptism ;  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above  all,  and 
through  all,  and  in  all."  Its  members  are  one  in  their  agreement 
in  the  same  fundamental  truths  of  Christianity ;  one  in  the  same 
profession  and  visible  ordinances;  partakers  of  one  spirit;  and 
one  in  the  same  hope  of  heaven.  The  unity  which  it  is  essential 
for  them  to  keep,  is  "  the  unity  of  the  spirit,  in  the  bond  of 
peace  ;"  provision  being  expressly  made  for  difference  of  opinion, 
and  difference  of  practice  in  unessential  things  :  those  who  ob- 
serve days  and  eat  meat,  and  those  who  do  not,  being  expressly 
forbidden  to  judge  one  another;  and  that  injunction  ending  in 
the  sharp  reprimand,  "  Who  art  thou,  that  judgest  another  man's 
servant?" 

This  universal  Church  is  independent  of  modes  of  organiza- 
tion, and  modes  of  worship  ;  it  being  in  these  respects  varia- 
ble, and  having  actually  varied  from  age  to  age.  Its  first  visible 
form  began  with  Abraham — when  it  had  a  sacrament^  but  no 
priesthood.  It  had  neither  presbyters  nor  bishops ;  but  it  was 
still  the  Church  of  the  living  God,  the  root  into  which  other 
Churches  are  graffed ;  and  how  much  soever  these  Churches 
may  glory  in  their  hierarchies,  or  how  much  soever  they  may 


THE  CHURCH. 

insist  that  there  cannot  be  a  Church  without  a  Bishop,  it  may 
still  be  said ^to  them,  "  Thou  bearest  not  the  root,  but  the  root 
thee;"  that  root  was  long  a  "Church  without  a  Bishop  ;"  even 
all  the  time  from  Abraham  to  Moses. 

When  the  Abrahamic  Church  had  continued  in  this  state 
four  centuries  and  more,  a  ritual  law  and  a  sacrificing  priesthood 
were  added  ;  both  of  which  were  typical  and  temporary  ;  being 
added  to  remain  only  "  till  the  promised  seed  should  come." 

When  Christ,  the  substance  of  these  types,  came,  the  types — 
both  priests,  rituals  and .  sacrifices — were  abolished.  There  is 
now  no  temple^  altar,  priest,  or  sacrifice.  The  dispensation  of 
the  Spirit  began  ;  the  blessing  of  Abraham  came  upon  the  Gen- 
tiles. In  all  these  changes  of  external  form,  the  Church  is  one ; 
its  design,  its  covenant,  its  foundation  •  being  the  same.  The 
unity  of  the  Church,  then,  can  by  no  means  consist  in  uniformity 
of  organization,  or  of  forms  of  worship. 

3.  As  VISIBLE  ORGANIZATIONS,  NO  CHURCHES  ARE  RECOGNIZED 
IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT,  EXCEPT  SUCH  AS  ARE  CONGREGATIONAL  ;* 
there  being  no  such  thing  as  a  National,  Provincial,  or  Diocesan 
organized  Christian  Church  even  alluded  to  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

Important  conclusions  follow  this  principle,  if  it  be  true.  Let 
those  whom  it  concerns  look  well  to  it.  If  there  be  no  National, 
Provincial,  or  Diocesan  Church  organization  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, then  there  can  be  no  offices  or  officers  corresponding  to 
such  organizations  ;  no  Pope,  no  Patriarch,  no  Diocesan  Bishop. 
These  offices  are  of  purely  human  device ;  there  is  no  place  or 
duty  for  them ;  no  provision  made  for  such  officers  in  the  Church 
of  God. 

It  follows,  moreover,  that  all  canons,  rituals,  and  Liturgies  pre- 
scribed for  the  Churches  of  any  nation,  province,  or  so  called 
diocese,  are  entirely  without  authority. 

Let  those  who  are  concerned,  therefore,  look  well  to  the  prin- 
ciple. 

We  read  of  "  The  Church  at  Jerusalem  ;"  "  the  Church  at  Anti- 
och ;"  "  the  Church  at  Corinth  ;"  at  Ephesus,  Smyrna,  Thyatira, 
Philadelphia,  Sardis,  Pergamos,  and  Laodicea.  We  redd  of  the 
Church  at  Cenchrea,  distinct  from  the  Church  at  Corinth,  though 
Cenchrea  was  the  port  of  that  city ;  of  the  "  Church  in  thy  house ;" 
the  "  Church  which  is  in  Nymphas'  house."  Nowhere  do  we  read 
of  the  Church  of  a  Nation,  a  Province,  or  of  a  Diocese  comprising 
several  congregations.  No  such  organization  is  mentioned,  re- 
ferred to,  or  implied  in  any  part  of  the  New  Testament.  On  the 

*  The  word  is  not  used  here  in  the  technical  sense;  i  e.  as  distinguishing;  Con- 
gregational from  Presbyterian.  The  Presbyterian  scheme,  as  well  as  the  Congre- 
gational, recognizes  "no  National,  Provincial,  o'r  Diocesan  officers,  corresponding 
to  a  National,  Provincial  or  Diocesan  organization. 


284  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

contrary,  when  a  province,  or  district  of  country  is  mentioned, 
we  read  of  the  Churches  of  that  province  or  district ;  we  read  of 
"  the  Churches  of  Galatia,"  "  the  Churches  of  Judea,"  "  the 
Churches  of  Asia,"  "  the  Churches  of  Macedonia."  Had  there 
been  a  Provincial  or  Diocesan  organization,  it  must  have  been 
mentioned. 

The  only  Church  organization  recognized  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  that  of  local  societies  or  congregations  of  believers,  joined 
together  under  Christ's  rules,  having  their  own  officers,  and 
meeting  for  social  worship,  for  the  observance  of  Christian 
sacraments,  and 'for  the  exercise  of  discipline  over  their  own 
members.* 

The  design  of  a  Church  organization  renders  a  larger  Church 
organization  needless.  If  Christ's  rules  are  a  safe  and  sufficient 
guide,  then  any  congregation  of  his  people,  anywhere,  have  all 
that  they  need  for  the  ends  of  worship,  instruction,  and  the 
observance  of  Christ's  ordinances  ;  for  their  mutual  watchfulness, 
encouragement,  consolation,  and  edification.  Nothing  forbids 
contiguous  Churches  to  associate  for  mutual  advice  and  advan- 
tage ;  but  to  no  higher  authority  are  they  necessarily  bound  ; 
since  for  a  Diocesan,  Provincial,  National,  or  Catholic  organiza- 
tion with  inherent  power  to  rule  over  his  Churches,  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  has  made  no  provision.  Nay,  he  has  forbidden  submis- 
sion to  such  power.  "  The  princes  of  the  Gentiles  exercise 
dominion  over  them,  and  they  that  are  great  exercise  authority 
upon  them  ;  but  it  shall  not  be  so  among  you" 

The  plea  for  the  exercise  of  such  authority  over  the  Churches ; 
for  the  imposition  of  canons,  ceremonies,  and  liturgies,  is,  the 
preservation  of  unity ;  the  prevention  of  schism ;  or  the  attain- 
ment of  uniformity.  But  turn  over  every  page  of  history,  from 
the  time  when  Victor  of  Rome  excommunicated  one  half 
of  the  Christian  world — trace  the  exercise  of  such  "dominion" 
where  it  leads  you;  and  you  must  follow  it  through  fields 
of  slaughter;  through  the  dungeons  of  the  Inquisitions  ;  through 
the  jails  and  prisons  of  England  ; — the  only  result  has  been 
to  create  oppression,  persecution,  corruptions,  schisms,  dis- 
tractions without  end.  When  shall  it  be  that  all  Christ's  people 
shall  vindicate  their  Christian  liberties  ? 

Having  gone  so  far,  we  might  rest  here ;  there  is  no  authority 
for  a  National,  Provincial,  or  Diocesan  Church  in  the  Word  of 
God.  We  are  not  bound  to  inquire  any  further.  Were  it  God's 
design  that  we  should  bear  allegiance  to  such  authority,  it  would 
have  been  mentioned  or  implied,  or  alluded  to,  in  his  Holy  Word, 
Since  it  is  not  mentioned  there,  those  who  demand  of  us  submis- 

*  The  reference  to  the  Apostles,  and  elders,  and  brethren,  at  Jerusalem,  made  by 
the  Church  at  Antioch,  concerning  the  matter  of  circumcision,  was  no  exception  to 
this  ;  it  was  simply  a  question  of  advice,  made  by  one  Church  to  another. 


THE  CHURCH.  285 

sion  to  such  authority,  come  without  warrant.  Prove  to  us 
that  such  organizations  and  authorities  existed  in  the  very  next 
age  (which  cannot  be  proved) — that  is  no  warrant;  it  imposes 
no  obligation.  The  Lord  meant  to  have  an  end  of  law-making 
for  his  Church,  when  he  made  an  end  of  it  in  his  Word. 

But  though  we  are  not  bound  to  inquire  any  further,  it  may 
be  well  just  to  look  at  the  nature  of  the  claims  for  a  further 
authority. 

After  searching  very  extensively  in  the  standard  writings  of 
Prelacy,  I  have  found  no  attempt  at  proof  of  a  Diocesan  organiza- 
tion from  the  New  Testament,  save  some  very  shrewd  conjec- 
tures as  to  what  might  have  been  the  case  in  certain  instances. 
It  is  conjectured  that  some  Churches,  as  those  of  Antioch  and 
Jerusalem,  might  have  been  so  numerous  as  to  require  several 
distinct  congregations  organized  as  Churches,  which  were  again 
combined  in  one  Church,  thus  making  a  diocese.  On  the  ground 
of  this  conjecture,  it  is  confidently  asserted  that  it  must  have  been  so; 
and  thereupon  Prelacy  sweeps  over  the  whole  ground,  and  de- 
clares that  churches  everywhere  are  bound  to  submit  to  Diocesan 
authority.  But  suppose  we  admit  this  conjecture  to  be  correct, 
that  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  and  that  at  Antioch  at  length  be- 
came Diocesan.  It  applies  only  to  one  or  two  large  cities  ; — 
while  all  the  rest  of  Christendom  is  left  destitute  of  dioceses; 
there  being  no  recognition  of  any  other  such  organization, 
and  no  necessity  or  ground  for  supposing  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment that  there  were  any  such.  The  proper  inference  is  that  both 
modes  have  an  example  in  Apostolical  times;  and  that  neither  is 
of  any  exclusive  authority. 

If,  however,  we  find  that  the  conjecture  is  incorrect,  and  that 
so  far  as  the  New  Testament  goes,  these  great  Churches  continued 
still  to  meet  together,  then  the  last  pretence  of  an  organized  Dio- 
cesan Church  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  vanishes  away. 

The  Prelatical  argument  is,  that  the  Church  of  Antioch  and 
Jerusalem  must  have  been  too  numerous  to  meet  together ;  and 
that,  therefore,  each  must  have  been  composed  of  several  churches 
united  in  a  Diocese.  No  direct  evidence  is  adduced  ;  the  argu- 
ment is  wholly  conjectural  or  inferential. 

And  first  with  regard  to  Jerusalem.  It  is  urged  that  three 
thousand  were  converted  on  the  day  of  Pentecost;  that  subse- 
quently there  were  added  to  the  Church  daily.  Again,  that  the 
number  of  the  men  who  believed,  was  about  five  thousand  ;  and 
how  could  so  numerous  a  Church  continue  to  meet  together  ?  If 
we  shall  show,  that  to  the  last  New  Testament  record  in  the 
case,  they  did  "come  together,"  we  need  not  trouble  ourselves 
about  the  difficulties.  That  proof  I  reserve,  till  we  have  consid- 
ered the  case  of  Antioch.  At  present  I  remark,  in  passing,  that 


286  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

those  converted  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  appear  to  have  been 
principally  strangers — dwellers  in  Mesopotamia,  Parthia,  Medes, 
Elamites,  and  others,  who  were  then  casually  at  Jerusalem,  and 
who  probably  soon  after  returned  to  their  homes.  What  accom- 
modations there  were  for  a  large  multitude  to  come  together,  may 
be  inferred  from  the  fact,  that  out  of  the  hearers  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  three  thousand  were  converted  ;  while  it  is  not  cer- 
tain that  the  converts  were  one  half  or  one  third  of  the  hearers. 
These  conjectures  may  fairly  be  set  over  against  all  conjectures 
on  the  other  side  ;  but  we  need  not  rely  upon  any  conjectures, 
since  we  have  the  direct  and  unequivocal  testimony  of  the  Word 
of  God. 

Let  us  turn  to  Antioch ;  and  that  we  may  have  the  full 
benefit  of  the  Prelatical  argument,  let  me  here  copy  the  words  of 
its  favorite  and  ablest  champion — SLATER,  in  his  "  Original 
Draught  of  the  Puritan  Church"  pp.  70,  71.  Says  Slater,  "  Anti- 
och was  early  blessed  with  the  glad  tidings  of  the  Gospel ;  the 
blood  of  the  first  martyr  became  the  seed  of  a  Christian  Church 
there,  as  the  Fathers  took  a  pleasure  to  speak ;  for  many  Chris- 
tians dispersed  on  that  occasion,  resorted  thither;  and  the  first 
account  we  have  of  their  labors  is,  that  the  hand  of  the  Lord 
was  with  them,  and  a  great  number  believed  and  turned  unto  the 
Lord"  "  Tidings  of  this  came  to  the  Church  of  Jerusalem, 
where  the  whole  college  of  Apostles  was  in  readiness  to  consult 
for  them."  "  They  send  Barnabas,  a  good  man,  and  full  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  of  faith,  to  improve  this  happy  opportunity,  and 
the  success  answered  their  expectation  ;  for  by  his  powerful 
exhortations  much  people,  says  the  holy  text,  was  added  to  the 
Lord.  But  to  forward  this  work  of  the  Lord  still  more,  Barna- 
bas travels  to  Tarsus,  and  joins  Saul,  the  great  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles  now,  and  returning  with  him  to  Antioch,  they  continue 
a  whole  year  together,  in  that  populous  city,  teaching  much  people. 
What  a  harvest  of  Christian  converts  those  Apostolical  laborers 
made  in  that  compass  of  time,  assisted  by  all  that  fled  thither 
from  Jerusalem  besides,  by  the  men  of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene,  fel- 
low laborers  with  them,  to  convert  the  Greeks  as  well  as  Jews  to 
the  faith  ;  and  by  the  several  inspired  prophets,  so  peculiarly 
noted  to  be  among  them,  I  refer  to  the  sober  judgment  of  all 
who  know  the  fruits  of  so  many  single  sermons  preached  by  an 
Apostle,  at  the  first  promulgation  of  the  Gospel.  Two  things  are 
sure,  1st.  That  the  reputation  arid  honor  of  the  converts  there 
were  such,  that  they  laid  aside  the  derided  name  of  Nazarenes  or 
Galileans  now,  and  openly  assumed  the  name  of  their  Lord  and 
Master,  and  were  first  called  Christians  there.  Secondly,  That 
there  were  two  distinct  sets  or  parties  of  them — Judaizing  Chris- 
tians, zealous  of  the  law,  and  Gentile  converts,  as  earnestly 


THE  CHURCH.  287 

insisting  on  their  freedom  and  exemption  from  it :  each  party  so 
considerable,  as  to  call  for  an  Apostolical  council  to  decide  the 
controversy  between  Ihem." 

"  Such  was  the  very  infant  state  of  this  Church  of  Antioch ; 
the  oversight  whereof,  antiquity  tells  us,  the  great  Apostle  St 
Peter,  in  a  peculiar  manner  took  upon  himself,  and  for  six  or 
seven  years  at  least,  made  it  his  first,  and  special  apostolic  see." 

This  is  all  that  Prelacy  can  allege  to  show  from  the  New 
Testament,  that  there  might  have  been  or  must  have  been,  a 
Diocesan  Church  at  Antioch  ;  the  force  of  the  argument  consists 
in  whatever  ground  there  may  be  to  conjecture,  that  the  Church 
at  Antioch  was  too  large  to  come  together. 

Let  us  compare  these  conjectures  with  the  Word  of  God. 
Slater  says,  "  Tidings  came  to  the  Church  of  Jerusalem,  where 
the  whole  college  of  Apostles  was  in  readiness  to  consult  for 
them.  They"  (the  college  of  Apostles)  "  send  Barnabas."  Turn 
to  Acts  xi.  22,  "  Then  tidings  of  these  things  came  unto  the  ears 
of  THE  CHURCH  which  was  in  Jerusalem  ;  and  THEY  sent  forth 
Barnabas."  There  is  no  breath  about  a  "  College  of  Apostles." 

Slater  again  :  "  They  continue  a  whole  year  in  that  populous 
city,  leaching  much  people"  The  sacred  record  says,  Acts  xi. 
26,  that  "  A  whole  year  they  assembled  themselves  WITH  THE 
CHURCH  and  taught  much  people." 

Slater  continues  to  argue  from  various  probabilities,  "  What 
a  harvest  of  converts  those  Apostolic  laborers  made ;"  he  accu- 
mulates circumstances  and  considerations,  to  show  how  nume- 
rous these  converts  must  have  been.  To  what  end  does  he  do 
this  ?  Why,  simply  to  show  that  the  Church  at  Antioch  must, 
from  its  numbers,  have  become  a  Diocese  embracing  several 
congregations  :  being  too  large  to  meet  TOGETHER. 

This,  then,  is  the  question :  Can  this  Church  at  Antioch  come 
together ;  or  can  it  not?  If  it  can  ;  and  if  the  same  continues 
true  of  the  Church  in  Jerusalem,  the  last  pretence  of  a  Scriptural 
Diocesan  Church,  for  ever  vanishes  away. 

What  says  the  Scripture  ?  In  Acts  xiv.  24,  27,  Barnabas  and 
Saul,  having  been  sent  from  the  Church  at  Antioch  through  sev- 
eral regions  on  a  special  work,  passing  through  Lystra,  Derbe, 
Iconium,  Antioch  in  Pisidia,  and  throughout  Pisidia,  to  Pam- 
philia  and  Attalia>  come  at  length  to  ANTIOCH,  "from  whence  they 
had  been  recommended  to  the  grace  of  God  for  t'he  work  which 
they  fulfilled."  "  And  when  they  were  come  and  had  GATHERED 
THE  CHURCH  TOGETHER."  This  was  after  the  time  of  the  great 
in-gathering  of  converts  at  Antioch.  No  necessity  for  a  Diocese 
on  account  of  the  impossibility  of  the  Church's  coming  together 
yet ;  for  they  not  only  "  gathered  the  Church  together,"  but  when 
they  had  done  so,  they  "  rehearsed  all  that  God  had  done  with 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

them"  But  this  is  not  all ;  the  record  goes  on  to  relate  that 
"  they  continued  a  long-  time  with  the  disciples.''1  And  in  that 
long  time,  what  further  came  to  pass  ?  Why,  a  dissension  arises 
about  lhe  doctrine  of  certain  Judaizing  teachers  from  Judea. 
"  THE  BRETHREN  "  at  Antioch  determine  that  Paul  and  Barna- 
bas, and  certain  other  of  them  should  go  up  to  Jerusalem  unto 
the  Apostles  and  elders  about  this  question.  Trace  these  •min- 
isters and  delegates.  "  And  when  they  were  come  to  Jerusa- 
lem, they  were  received  OF  THE  CHURCH,  AND  OF  THE  APOSTLES 
AND  ELDERS."  *  *  "  Then  ciU  the  multitude  kept  silence  and  gave 
audience  to  Barnabas  and  Saul."  *  *  *  "Then  it  pleased 
the  Apostles  and  elders  with  the  WHOLE  CHURCH  to  send  chosen 
men  of  their  own  company."  They  wrote  in  the  name  of  "  The 
Apostles,  and  elders,  and  brethren."  So  when  these  chosen 
men  were  dismissed,  "  They  came  to  Antioch ;  and  when  they 
HAD  GATHERED  THE  MULTITUDE  TOGETHER,  they  delivered  the 
epistle."  At  the  latest  record,  the  Church  of  Antioch  and  the 
Church  at  Jerusalem  come  together,  and  act  IN  A  BODY,  as  Con- 
gregational Churches. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  say  more.  The  New  Testament  record 
is  so  circumstantial  and  varied,  that  had  there  been  a  Diocesan 
organization,  in  the  times  within  the  scope  of  its  history,  some, 
hint  or  allusion  to  its  existence,  must  have  been  left  on  the  sacred 
page. 

As  to  the  Fathers ;  there  could  not  have  been  a  Diocesan  Church 
in  their  times,  till  they  had  altered  the  constitution  of  Church 
government  traced  in  the  Word  of  God.  All  that  the  Lord  in- 
tended to  render  obligatory,  he  doubtless  caused  to  be  put  on  the 
record,  either  in  direct  terms,  or  by  some  implication  or  allusion  ; 
otherwise  we  are  thrown  upon  tradition,  or  Church  authority.  The 
Bible,  in  that  case,  is  not  our  guide  or  rule;  and  we  know  not  where 
we  may  be  tossed  or  driven.  No  testimony  of  the  Fathers,  there- 
fore, no  possible  arguments  can  render  that  binding,  in  the  very 
principles  and  fundamentals  of  Church  organization  and  govern- 
ment, of  which  no  trace  is  written  on  the  pages  of  the  Sacred 
Word. 


XXII. 


MATERIALS,    STRUCTURE,  AND  DISCIPLINE    OF 
A  CHRISTIAN  CHURCH. 

Scriptural  Authority.     The  arrangements  of  Prelacy  contrary  to  Scripture. 

1.   Of  what  materials  is  a  Christian  Church  to  be  composed  ? 

In  the  present  state  of  the  world,  may  the  Church,  wherever 
she  goes,  gather  the  whole  population,  by  "  street  rows,"  parishes, 
or  by  entire  nations,  indiscriminately  into  her  bosom  1 

Paul  writes  to  "  The  Church  of  God  at  Corinth,"  thus  (1 
Cor.  v.):  "  I  ivrite  unto  you,  not  to  company  withfornicators  ;  yet 
not  altogether  with  the  fornicators  of  this  world,  or  with  the  cov- 
etous, or  extortioners,  or  with  idolaters,  for  then  ye  must  needs  go 
out  of  the  world;  but  now  I  have  written  unto  you,  not  to  keep 
company,  IF  ANY  MAN  THAT  is  CALLED  A  BROTHER,  be  afornicator, 
or  covetous,  or  an  idolator,  or  a  railer,  or  a  drunkard,  or  an  extor- 
tioner;  WITH  SUCH  A  ONE  NO  NOT  TO  EAT  J  for  W/lttt  have  I  to  do 

to  judge  them  also  that  are  without?     Do  not  ye  judge  them  that 
are  within" 

Here  are  established  certain  principles: 

1.  That  each  Church  is  to  "judge  "  of  the  qualifications  and 
character  of  its  members. 

2.  That  merely  being  "  called  a  brother"  i.  e.  being  regarded 
as  a  nominal  Christian  (holding  the  belief  of  Christianity  rather 
than  of  Judaism,  Paganism,    Mohammedanism,  or  Infidelity), 
does  not  entitle  one  to  be  regarded  as  a  member  of  a  Church, 
while  his  conduct  falsifies  and  shames  such  a  profession.     The 
Church  must  cast  him  out,  even  if  he  is  within ;  much  more, 
being  without,  they  may  not  admit  one  of  such  a  character  to 
their  communion  ;  i.  e.  they  are  bound  to  judge  concerning  the 
character  and  qualifications  of  their  members  ;  and  to  cast  out, 
much  more  to  keep  out  the  grossly  immoral ;  whatever  their  pro- 
fessions.    With  such  a  one,  says  the   Apostle,    "  No  NOT  TO 
EAT  ;" — not  by  the  slightest  act  of  recognition,  to  own  him   as 
a  brother  in  the  Church.     As  one  of  the  world,  you  may  hold 
necessary  dealings  and  intercourse  with  him,  as  with  a  heathen 

19 


290  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

man  and  a  publican ;  but  his  pretensions  as  a  Christian  brother, 
you  are  not  to  countenance. 

Such  instructions  Paul  had  already  given  to  the  Corinthian 
Church ;  and  now  he  sharply  rebukes  them  that  they  had  not 
cast  out  a  notorious  fornicator.  "  Know  ye  not  that  a  little  lea' 
ven  leaveneth  the  whole  lump  ?  Purge  out  therefore  the  old  lea- 
ven ;"  that  is,  put  such  a  wicked  person  away.  But  a  Church 
gathered  by  "  street  rows,"  in  any  part  of  Christendom,  will  have 
more  than  "  a  little  leaven  "  in  it;  the  majority  of  such  Churches 
will  consist  of  a  large  proportion  of  leaven,  as  the  world  now  goes. 
In  such  a  Church  discipline  is  impossible  ;  as  the  very  idea  of  dis- 
cipline, in  such  a  case,  is  an  absurdity.  Such  a  Church  is  cor- 
ruptly constituted,  and  being  made  up  mainly  of  those  who  spirit- 
ually reject  Christ,  it  will  reject  Christ's  laws. 

Nor  does  it  alter  the  case,  that  these  people  are  gathered  (as 
is  pretended)  under  a  true  successional  priesthood ;  and  under 
the  notion  that  baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  administered  by 
that  priesthood,  confer  regeneration  and  impart  a  sanctifying  vir- 
tue. Nothing  is  more  notoriously  untrue.  The  people  of  the 
National  Church  of  England  have  all  been  baptized;  but  nothing 
is  more  notorious  and  undeniable,  than  that  multitudes  of  them 
are  fornicators,  profane  swearers,  and  otherwise  as  utterly  destitute 
of  all  religion  as  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom  or  Gomorrah.  The 
same  is  true  of  every  National  Church,  and  of  all  particular 
Churches  indiscriminately  gathered.  And  when,  or  where,  has 
an  instance  occurred  of  such  a  discipline  as  the  Gospel  enjoins  ; 
viz.  the  casting  out,  or  excommunication,  of  grossly  vicious  or 
immoral  persons,  in  all  the  Episcopal  Churches  in  England  or  the 
United  States  ? 

A  little  attention  to  facts,  will  show  a  state  of  things,  which 
calls  for  deep  reflection  on  the  part  of  all  true  Christians,  who 
stand  connected  with  churches  gathered  on  this  indiscriminate 
principle.  The  Oxford  Tract,  No.  59,*  says  "Every  church- 
warden in  every  parish  in  England,  is  called  upon  once  a  year, 
to  attend  the  visitation  of  his  Archdeacon.  At  this  time,  oaths 
are  tendered  to  him  *  and  among  other  things  he 

swears,  that  he  will  present  to  the  Archdeacon  the  names  of  all 
such  inhabitants  of  his  parish  as  are  leading  notoriously  immoral 
lives.  This  oath  is  regularly  taken  once  a  year,  by  every  church- 
warden in  every  parish  in  England ;  yet  I  believe,  that  such  a 
thing-  as  any  single  presentation  for  notoriously'  immoral  conduct 
has  scarcely  been  heard  of  in  a  century"  Again,  Tract  No.  41  f 
says,  "  I  think  the  Church  has  in  a  measure  forgotten  its  own 
principles,  as  declared  in  the  sixteenth  century ;  nay,  under 

*  Quoted  in  Coleman's  Primitive  Church.         t  Quoted  in  Coleman,  p.  122. 


THE    CHRISTIAN    CHURCH.  291 

stranger  circumstances  *  *  than  have  attended  any  of  the 
errors  and  corruptions  of  the  Papists.  Grievous  as  are  their  de- 
clensions from  primitive  usage,  I  never  heard  in  any  case,  of 
their  practice  directly  contradicting  their  services  ;  whereas  we 
go  on  lamenting  once  a  year  the  absence  of  discipline  in  our 
church,  yet  do  not  dream  of  taking  any  one  step  towards  its  res- 
toration." 9 

Thus  speak  the  Tractarians,  with  regard  to  the  English  Church. 
With  regard  to  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country,  hear  Dr. 
Hawkes,  in  his  "  Contributions  to  the  Ecclesiastical  History,  &c." 
[pp.  359,  360] :  It  is  true,  the  power  of  excommunication  does 
belong  to  the  Church ;  it  does,  too,  deprive  of  all  the  privileges  of 
church  membership;  and  it  is  the  most  awful  power  ever  confided 
by  heaven  to  man ;  rightfully  exercised,  its  consequences  (though 
the  world  may  scorn  them)  are  of  the  most  terrific  character,  if  the 
Scriptures  be  true" 

Since,  then,  excommunication  is  a  power  given  to  the  Church ; 
and  since  the  exercise  of  that  power,  in  worthy  cases,  is  enjoined 
by  the  Word  of  God,  does  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this  coun- 
try ever  exercise  that  power  ?  Or  if  not,  is  it  because  there  are  no 
subjects,  within  her  pale,  whose  character  demands  it  ?  Hear 
Dr.  Hawkes  in  continuation : 

"  It  is  true  the  power  of  excommunication  does  belong  to  the 
Church."  *  *  *  *  "  BUT  WHO  EVER  HEARD  OF  THE  EX- 
COMMUNICATION OF  A  layman  by  our  BRANCH  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC 
CHURCH  ?  The  law  is  a  dead  letter.  Neither  the  General  Con- 
vention nor  any  state  Convention  have  ever  provided  any  rules  or 
process  for  excommunication.  THERE  is  NOT  A  CLERGYMAN  IN 
THE  CHURCH,  WHO,  IF  HE  WERE  EVER  so  DESIROUS  TO  EXCOM- 
MUNICATE AN  OFFENDER,  WOULD  KNOW  HOW  TO  TAKE  THE  VERY 

FIRST  STEP  IN  THE  PROCESS.  It  certainly  is  not  to  be  done  ac- 
cording to  his  mere  whirn;  and  if  it  were  so  done,  it  is  as  cer- 
tainly invalid.  Shall  then  the  PRESBYTER  alone  do  it ;  or  shall  it 
be  done  by  his  BISHOP  ;  or  by  a  CONCLAVE  OF  BISHOPS  ;  or  of 
BISHOPS  AND  PRESBYTERS  ]  or  by  a  STATE  CONVENTION,  including 
the  laity;  or  by  the  GENERAL  CONVENTION,  including  the 
laity  again  ?  NO  MAN  CAN  ANSWER,  FOR  THERE  is 
NO  RULE  ON  THE  SUBJECT  ;  andwe  are  glad  that  it  is  so :  for  our 
excommunication,  bringing  in  its  train  no  penalty  which  would 
be  felt,  depriving-  a  man  of  no  civil  rights,  would  be  laughed  at 
as  mere  brutum  fulmen.  The  spiritual  consequences  would  not 
be  thought  of."  *  *  *  *  "  To  our  apprehension,  the  rubric 
is,  on  this  subject,  quite  law  enough,  unless  we  had  power  to 
make  the  discipline  of  the  Church  to  be  more  felt  as  a  punish- 
ment." 

Alas !  that  a  minister  of  Christ  should  acknowledge  it  to  be 


292  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Christ's  ordinance,  that  vicious  and  incorrigible  offenders  should 
be  excommunicated  by  the  Church;  and  then,  declaring  that  "No 
man  can  answer"  how,  or  by  whom,  that  is  to  be  done ;  arid  that 
no  minister  in  the  Church  can  tell  "  how  to  take  the  very  first  step 
in  the  process  ;"  should  express  his  pleasure  "  that  it  is  .so;" — 
"  We  are  glad  it  is  so  /"  Glad  that  Christ's  laws  are  neutralized 
and  nullified  in  the  Church!  And  Dr.  Hawkes  really  thinks 
and  declares,  that  excommunication  would  all  be  idle  and  laugh- 
able, and  is  therefore  usele'ss,  unless  the  Church  had  power  to 
"  deprive  a  man  of  some  civil  rights  ;"  or  "  to  make  the  discipline 
of  the  Church  more  felt  as  a  punishment  /"  Has  Christ  then  been 
unwise  in  enjoining  the  discipline  of  excommunication,  unless 
he  would  give  his  Church  some  of  the  power  of  the  kingdoms 
of  this  world?  Were  not  the  subject  so  solemn,  how  supreme- 
ly ridiculous  it  would  be,  after  all  the  loud  vauntings  of  the 
"  Apostolic  Church"  to  hear  this  confession ;  that  no  man  in  the 
Church  knows  how  to  take  the  very  first  step  in  a  process  which 
Christ  has  so  clearly  marked  out  and  enjoined.  How  to  do  it; 
who  can  do  it :  Presbyter,  Bishop,  General  Conyention,  State 
Convention,  a  conclave  of  Bishops,  a  conclave  of  Bishops 
and  Presbyters,  or  conclave  including  the  laity,  either  the  State 
laity,  or  the  general  laity : — really  Dr.  Hawkes,  with  all  his  elabo- 
rate research  into  "  Constitutions  and  Canons,"  cannot  tell !  He 
is  sure  no  clergyman  or  layman  in  their  whole  Church  can  tell ; 
and  he  is  glad  of  it ! 

If  he  will  just  throw  away  his  "  Constitutions  and  Canons," 
and  go  to  the  Bible,  he  will  find  the  matter  pointed  out  very 
minutely  by  our  Lord's  own  finger,  in  the  eighteenth  of  Matthew ; 
— Go  to  the  offender  alone  ;  if  he  refuse  to  hear  thee,  take  an- 
other with  thee  ;  if  you  cannot  gain  him  so,  then  "  TELL  IT  TO  THE 
CHURCH  :"  That  is  the  injunction :  "  Tell  it  to  the  CHURCH  :" 
not  to  the  Archdeacon  ;  not  to  the  Rector ;  not  to  the  Bishop  ; 
not  to  the  General  or  State  convention  ;  no,  nor  to  any  conclaves 
of  dignitaries. — but  TO  THE  CHURCH  :"  and  if  he  refuse  to  hear 
THE  CHURCH,  "let  him  be  unto  thee  as  a  heathen  man  and  a 
publican;"  as  a  bad  man,  having  no  standing  or  privileges  as 
a  member  of  the  Church.  Call  for  no  civil  penalties  ;  if  the 
offender  does  not  feel  this  "  as  a  punishment,"  then  reform  your 
Church,  so  that  it  will  be  something  to  turn  a  man  out  of  it  into 
the  world. 

If  there  should  arise  any  doubt  whether  the  Rector  is  not  "the 
Church,"  or  whether  the  Bishop  is  not  the  Church,  turn  to  1  Cor. 
v.,  and  you  will  find  that  it  is  such  a  Church  as  can  be  "gathered 
together;"  and  certainly  a  Bishop  or  a  Rector  would  appear  very 
singular  in  "gathering"  himself,  all  alone,  "  together"  for  the  pur- 
pose of  hearing  and  deciding  in  matters  of  discipline.  If  any 


THE    CHRISTIAN   CHURCH.  293 

doubt  still  remains,  whether  it  be  not  some  State  or  general  con- 
clave that  constitutes  the  Church,  turn  to  i  Cor.  i.  2,  and  you  will 
find  that  Paul  speaks  of  a  local  Church,  "The  Church  of  God 
which  is  at  Corinth  ;"  and  it  is  made  up  of  them  that  are  "  called 
to  be  saints ;"  who,  at  least  by  their  profession,  and  in  the  judg- 
ment of  charity,  are  in  some  measure  "  sanctified  in  Christ 
Jesus" 

It  is  most  manifest,  and  undeniable,  that  the  Episcopal  Church 
has  made  void  an  acknowledged  ordinance  of  Christ,  by  its  tra- 
ditions and  canons.  And  this  error  springs  from  another  still 
more  radical ;  from  sweeping  the  world  indiscriminately,  with  a 
drag-net,  into  the  bosom  of  the  Church.  No  discipline,  such  as 
Christ  enjoins,  ever  has  been  maintained,  or  ever  can  be  main- 
tained in  a  Church  so  constituted.  In  one  word  ;  THE  WORLD, 
under  any  form  or  principle  of  organization,  CAN  NEVER  FORM  A 

GOOD  INSTRUMENTALITY  FOR  MAINTAINING  THE  TRUTH  OF  CHRIST, 
AND  THE  DISCIPLINE  of  CHRIST'S  CHURCH. 

Of  what  MATERIALS,  then,  is  a  Church  of  Christ  to  be  com- 
posed ?  I  answer,  of  those  who  CREDIBLY  PROFESS  to  be  the  real 
disciples  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  If  any  confessedly  have  no 
repentance  toward  God,  and  no  faith  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  it 
is  a  gross  absurdity  to  think  of  gathering  them  into  the  Church 
of  Christ.  If  any  make  such  a  profession,  and  yet  profess  it 
not  credibly, — evidently  mistaking  the  nature  of  faith  and  re- 
pentance, or  in  works  and  character,  falsifying  their  profession, 
they  are  not  to  be  received  ;  for  such,  in  case  of  definable  crimes 
and  immoralities,  are,  upon  proof,  to  be  cast  out;  even  after  they 
have  found  admission.  How  much  more  are  they  not  to  be  admit- 
ted ? 

The  New  Testament,  when  it  speaks  of  a  Christian  Church, 
always  presumes  that  it  is  made  up  of  visible  saints  by  the  call- 
ing of  God.  Thus  1  Cor.  i.  2  ;  "  Unto  the  Church  of  God  whichis 
at  Corinth  ;"  "  to  them  that  are  sanctified  in  Christ  Jesus]' — 
"  called  to  be  saints"  So  Ephesians  i.  1 :  "  To  the  saints  which 
are  at  Ephesus,  and  to  the  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus"  And,  through- 
out, their  true  conversion  and  faith  are  assumed.  Paul  speaks 
of  them  as  " having  trusted  in  Christ" — " obtained  inheritance" 
— "  sealed  with  that  Holy  Spirit  of  promise" — "  And  you  hath  he 
quickened."  To  the  Church  of  the  Philippians  he  writes,  "  To 
all  the  saints  in  Christ  Jesus,"  "To  the  saints  and  faithful  breth- 
ren in  Christ  which  are  at  Colosse" 

It  is  not  pretended  that  a  visible  Church  must  be  made  up  ex- 
clusively of  true  Christians.  £>ome  deceive  themselves  ;  some 
are  very  possibly  hypocrites  ;  some  show  that  they  are  "  false 
brethren."  All  that  we  affirm  is,  that  the  materials  of  the  Church 


294  THE  PURITANS  AXD  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

must  be  such  as  credibly  profess   a    true    allegiance   to   the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.* 

Having  taken  this  view  of  the  proper  Church  materials^  we 
come 

3.  To  THE  MANNER  OF  PUTTING  THESE  MATERIALS  TOGETHER 
IN  ORDER  TO  CONSTITUTE  A  CHURCH. 

A  number  of  baptized  believers  dwelling  in  the  same  vicin- 
ity, do  not,  necessarily  constitute  a  Church.  They  must  asso- 
ciate together  for  the  enjoyment  of  Christian  ordinances,  and 
for  other  ends  of  Church  fellowship.  Doing  this,  they  are  a 
Church,  even  before  they  have  appointed  a  single  officer,  and 
without  regard  to  the  peculiar  organization  which  they  may 
adopt.  An  imperfect  or  inexpedient  manner  of  organization  and 
of  polity,  does  not  destroy  their  Church  existence  ;  unless  it  is 
such  an  organization  as  necessarily  defeats  the  very  ends  for 
which  a  Church  was  instituted.  The  words  of  the  Cambridge 
Platform  (c.  v.  1)  are  to  the  purpose:  "  A  Church  being  a  com- 
pany of  people  combined  together  by  covenant  for  the  worship 
of  God,  it  appeareth  thereby,  that  there  may  be  the  essence  and 
being  of  a  Church  without  any  officers  ;  seeing  there  is  both  the 
form  and  matter  of  a  Church  ;  which  is  implied  when  it  is  said, 
The  Apostles  ordained  elders  in  every  Church,"  i.  e.  there  were 
churches  before  there  were  Church  officers ;  as  there  must  be 
society  before  there  are  rules. 

But  how  do  Christians  become  thus  associated  ?  The  formal 
manner  is  indifferent ;  provided  there  is  the  substance.  If  these 
come  together  with  a  mutual,  though  informal,  understanding ; 
and  act  together  as  a  Church,  they  thereby  bind  themselves  to 
the  duties  of  Church  members  in  that  Church.  This  appears  to 
have  been  the  usual  mode  of  gathering  Churches  under  the 
labors  of  the  Apostles ;  nothing  further  appears  on  the  record. 
A  disorderly  or  vicious  brother  might  be  admonished  or  cast  out 
according  to  Christ's  laws,  as  well  as  though  the  covenant  had 
been  ever  so  formal. 

People  afterwards  joined  the  Church  on  profession  of  their 

*  Let  those  who  would  see  the  matters  of  Church  materials,  power,  structure, 
and  things  of  that  sort,  ably  and  conclusively  handled,  turn  to  the  first  six  chapters 
of  the  Cambridge  Platform.  Every  word  of  those  chapters  was  well  pondered.  Its 
statements  and  definitions  are  given  in  the  most  studied  and  guarded  terms  :  show- 
ing the  whole  to  be  the  work  of  men  who  had  spent  more  time,  and  expended  more 
toil,  in  studying  these  subjects  than  have  been  given  to  them  by  most  divines  in 
modern  days.  The  subject  had  been  earnestly  discussed  for  more  than  an  age  ;  the 
various  difficulties,  and  the  bearing  of  various  principles,  were  most  clearly  seen  by 
the  men  who  drew  up  that  Platform.  The  various  treatises  and  tracts  of  OWEN  on 
the  same  subjects,  will  richly  repay  any  one  who  feels  it  worth  his  time  to  give 
these  matters  an  examination.  The  recent  works  of  Punchard  and  Coleman  are 
also  a  rich  contribution  to  this  branch  of  theology.  The  cause  of  truth  and  godli- 
ness bears  a  more  intimate  relation  to  Church  order  and  government,  than  those 
who  have  thought  little  on  the  subject  are  apt  to  suppose. 


DISCIPLINE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  295 

faith,  being  baptized,  and  being  received  to,  and  enjoying  tip 
privileges  of  Church  members  ;  they  thereby  assumed  the  duties 
of  members  of  the  Church.  On  these  principles  our  Puritan 
Fathers  acted,  but  they  made  the  confession  and  covenant  formal. 
There  are  advantages  in  this  formal  mode  of  confession  and 
covenant,  while  no  possible  mode  of  confessing  Christ,  and 
availing  one's  self  of  the  privileges  of  Church  membership,  in- 
volves less  than  the  substance  of  what  is  here  done  in  form.* 

4.  IN  CASES  OF  DISCIPLINE,  TO  WHOM  IS  THE  OFFENCE  TO  BE 
TOLD  ;  AND  WHEN  NECESSARY,  WHO  IS  -TO  TRY  AND  PRONOUNCE 
SENTENCE  UPON  THE  OFFENDER? 

We  have  already  referred  to  the  answer  in  Matt,  xviii.,  "  TELL 
IT  TO  THE  CHURCH;"  "AND  IF  HE  REFUSE  TO  HEAR  THE 
CHURCH,"  &c.  The  Church,  then,  is  the  tribunal  which  is  to  hear 
and  issue  complaints,  to  remonstrate,  rebuke,  and  when  necessa- 
ry, to  excommunicate.  We  have  already  seen  from  1  Cor.  v. 
that  this  is  such  a  Church  as  may  be  "gathered  together"  In 
Matt,  xviii.  Christ  adds,  "  Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth 
shall  be  bound  in  Heaven  ;"  whatsoever  ye,  the  Church,  shall 
bind ;  not  that  the  excommunication  of  a  member  seals  his  dam- 
nation, but  Christ  in  Heaven  will  require  of  its  members  a  due 
regard  to  such  decisions  of  the  Church;  and  so  far  forth 
clothes  the  Church  with  authority.  Paul  asserts  the  same  prin- 
ciple in  1  Cor.  v.  "  In  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  when 
ye  are  gathered  together,  and  my  spirit,with  the  power  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  to  deliver  such  a  one  to  Satan'"  that  is, by  Christ's 
requisition  and  authority,  they  are  to  gather  together  for  such  a 
purpose ;  and  when  gathered  together,  they  are  clothed  "  with  the 
power  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ" — with  whatever  power  he 
has  committed  to  human  hands,  for  the  authoritative  exercise  of 
discipline  in  the  Church. 

If  this  is  Christ's  LAW  on  this  subject,  then  it  follows :  1.  That 

*  When  a  candidate  seeks  admission  into  a  Congregational  Church,  in  some  cases 
he  comes  into  the  Church  meeting,  and  either  orally,  or  in  a  brief  writing,  gives 
the  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in  him.  In  others,  this  is  done  in  conversation  with 
a  committee  of  the  Church,  or  with  the  pastor;  and  after  being  duly  propounded, 
if  no  objections  are  made,  he  is  received  by  owning  the  confession  and  covenant 
of  the  Church. 

The  nature  of  the  qualifications  for  membership  is  thus  stated  by  COT.TON  in 
his  "  Way  of  the.  New  England  Churches"  written  two  hundred  years  ago.  "  In  this 
we  do  not  exact  eminent  measure,  either  of  knowledge  or  holiness  ;  but  do  stretch  out 
our  hands  to  receive  the  iveak  in  faith;  such  in  whose  spirits  we  can  discern  the  least 
measure  of  breathing  and  panting  after  Christ,  in  their  sensible  feeling  of  a  lost 
estate;  for  we  had  rather  that  ninety  nine  hypocrites  should  perish  through  pre- 
sumption, than  one  humble  soul  belonging  to  Christ  should  sink  under  discourage- 
ment and  despair."  Can  any  one  imagine,  that  the  Apostles  and  early  Churches 
used  less  discrimination  than  this? 

The  principle  of  communion  is  thus  nobly  stated  by  OWEN  ,  "  And  we  do  there- 
fore affirm,  that  we  will  never  deny  that  communion  unto  any  person,  high  or  low,  rich 
or  poor,  old  or  young,  male  or  female,  WHOSE  DUTY  IT  is  TO  DESIRE  IT." 


296  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

BO  governor,  pastor,  or  Prelate,  has  power  to  turn  men  out  of 
Christ's  Church,  or  to  impose  the  continuance  of  an  unworthy 
member  upon  the  Church;  but  the  brotherhood  hold  the  power 
in  their  own  hands.  2.  That  every  member  of  the  Church  has 
a  right  to  be  judged  by  his  peers.  That  is,  THE  CHURCH  is  NOT 
A  MONARCHY,  BUT  A  REPUBLIC  ;  and  from  this  idea,  elaborated 
by  our  Puritan  forefathers,  and  vindicated  by  their  sufferings  and 
firmness,  is  derived  the  very  idea  and  germ  of  our  AMERICAN 
REPUBLIC. 

In  this  point  of  view,  the  organization  of  the  Puritan  Churches 
differs  heaven-wide  from  all  Prelatical  Churches.  On  the  Epis- 
copal scheme,  whatever  discipline  may  be  exercised,  it  is  to  be 
exercised  arbitrarily  by  the  Rector  and  Bishop.  The  people  have 
not  the  slightest  power.  They  can  neither  exclude  an  unworthy 
associate,  nor  defend  an  injured  one.  In  this  most  important  re- 
spect, the  Bishop  is  King,  and  the  Rector  is  a  subordinate  satrap ; 
the  people  have  no  right  nor  duties  in  the  case,  except  to  acquiesce 
in  the  mandate  of  their  masters.  On  the  Prelatical  scheme,  the 
offence  is  never  told  "to  the  Church;"  the  Church  is  never  "gath- 
ered together  "  for  such  a  purpose  ;  but  Christ's  law  is  set  aside 
and  forbidden. 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  evade  the  force  of  these  two  pas- 
sages in  Matt,  xviii.,  and  1  Cor.  v. 

It  is  said  with  regard  to  the  direction  in  Matt,  xviii.,  that  the 
Church  was  not  then  constituted ;  and  consequently  that  a  Chris- 
tian congregation  cannot  be  the  Church  intended ;  but  that  the 
direction  means,  Tell  it  to  the  synagogue.  The  absurdity  of  this 
evasion  appears  from  several  considerations.  (1.)  The  disci- 
ples could  understand  the  meaning  of  the  word  Church  here  as 
well  as  they  could  in  the  passage  two  chapters  previous,  Matt. 
xvi.,  when  Christ  says,  "  On  this  rock  will  I  build  my  Church;" 
he  could  not  refer  to  building  up  a  Jewish  synagogue.  (2.) 
Nothing  shows  that  the  word  Church  here,  is  used  out  of  its 
usual  sense.  It  was  one  of  the  most  common  words  among  the 
disciples,  from  this  time  to  the  end  of  the  New  Testament.  (3.) 
It  is  impossible  to  suppose  that  Christ  would  refer  his  disciples 
to  the  Jewish  synagogue  as  a  proper  tribunal  when  the  Jews 
had  already  agreed,  that  if  any  man  should  confess  Christ,  he 
should  be  put  out  of  the  synagogue.  Surely  Christ  did  not 
require  his  disciples  to  treat  such  a  person,  so  cast  out  of  a  Jewish 
synagogue,  as  "  a  heathen  man  and  a  publican." 

With  regard  to  1  Cor.  v.,  an  invasion  is  attempted  which  is  thus 
set  forth  by  Mr.  Chapin  in  his  "  Primitive  Church."  "  The  sen- 
tence" he  says,  "  was  by  the  Apostle,  the  execution  of  it  was  com- 
mitted to  the  Church,  either  as  a  part  of  their  official  duty,  or  in 
consequence  of  the  Apostle's  absence."  (p.  139.) 


DISCIPLINE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  297 

But  Paul's  direction  is  no  sentence,  he  is  only  laying1  down  the 
law,  under  which,  the  Church  is  the  tribunal  to  hear,  determine, 
and  execute. 

1.  He  had  heard  of  the  case  only  by  report.     Is  he  passing  sen- 
tence of  condemnation  on  hearsay,  without  trial,  and  without  spe- 
cifying the  person  on  whom  the  sentence  is  pronounced? 

On  the  principle  laid  down  by  Mr.  Chapin,  a  diocesan  Bishop 
has  only  to  hear  a  report  concerning  some  member  of  a  Church 
at  a  distance,  and  forthwith  he  may  pronounce  his  sentence,  which 
the  Church  must  execute.  They  may  guess  who  it  is  that  is  con- 
demned ;  and  if  the  person  arrested  pleads  not  guilty,  no  matter, 
the  Church  is  no  tribunal :  they  cannot  institute  an  inquiry  ivhe- 
ther  he  has  done  this  thing-,  for  sentence  is  passed,  and  they  are 
only  executioners !  The  only  possible  inquiry  which  they  are 
competent  to  make  is,  whether  this  is  the  person  whom  the 
Bishop  intends;  if  so,  away  with  him;  he  is  condemned,  sen- 
tenced, executed  without  trial!  Is  this  the  law  of  Prelacy? 
Why  even  a  Jew  could  demand,  u  DOTH  OUR  LAW  JUDGE  ANY 
MAN  BEFORE  IT  HEAR  HIM  ?"  Paul  himself  said  with  indignation, 
"  THEY  HAVE  BEATEN  us  OPENLY  UNCONDEMNED,  BEING  ROMANS: 
and  now  do  they  thrust  us  out  privily  ?"  Was  Paul  a  man  to 
pronounce  sentence  without  a  hearing  ?  Even  if  he  had  done 
so,  the  Church  must  have  instituted  an  inquiry,  (1.)  who  was  the 
man  intended  :  and  (2.)  whether  he  h?.d  "  done  this  thing-;"  since 
Paul  condemns  no  other :  so  that  in  any  case  the  Church  is  the 
tribunal  to  hear  and  determine  ;  and  Paul's  direction  can  be  re- 
garded in  no  other  light  than  as  an  instruction  concerning  the 
law  and  their  duty  in  the  case. 

2.  The   context  shows  this  to  be  the  nature  of  Paul's  injunc- 
tion.     "  Purge  out  the  old  leaven."    "  I  wrote  to  you  in  an  epis- 
tle, not  to  company  with  fornicators."     *     *     "But  now  I  have 
written  to  you,  not  to  keep  company,  if  ANY  MAN  THAT  is  CALLED 
A  BROTHER,  be  a  fornicator,"  &c.,  &c.,  "  with  SUCH  AN  ONE,  no,  not 
TO  EAT."     Here  is  no  sentence  upon  a' particular  individual,  but 
a  GENERAL  LAW  applicable  to  the  case  of  "  ANY  MAN"  that  is  called 
brother,  who  is  found  to  be  "  SUCH  A  ONE  :"  and   to  make  the 
matter  entirely  indubitable,  the  Apostle  adds — "  Do  not  YE  JUDGE 
them  that  are  within  ?"* 

*  Our  author  himself  is  not  satisfied  with  his  interpretation,  though  he  hangs 
tremendous  consequences  upon  it.  After  taking  his  stand,  that  Paul  is  here  pro- 
nouncing a  judicial  sentence,  which  the  Church  is  merely  called  upon  to  execute,  he 
says  (p.  139),  "  There  is  another  interpretation  of  this  passage,  which  may,  after  all, 
be  the  true^  one."  *  *  *  *  "  In  this  view,  the  decree  of  the  Apostle  would 
have  the  force  of  a  Canon,  and  the  office  of  the  Church  would  be  the  execution  of  the 
law.  *  *  *  The  act  of  the  Church,  therefore,  in  either  point  of  view,  was  that 
of  execution"  This  is  erroneous !  If  Paul  is  not  giving  a  judicial  sentence,  but  only 
declaring  the  law,  or  "  Canon, "  then  the  Church  does  not  execute  a  sentence;  but 
institutes  a  process  of  law.  The  Church  is  therefore  a  Tribunal;  to  hear,  decide, 


298  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

On  turning  to  2  Cor.  ii.  6,  we  find  that  the  Church  had 
exercised  discipline  upon  the  offender  to  good  purpose.  He  had 
repented;  and  now  Paul  exhorts  the  Church  to  restore  him. 
"  Sufficient  to  such  a  man  is  this  punishment  which  was  inflicted 
of  many ;  so  that  contrary  wise,  ye  ought  rather  to  forgive  him." 

Such  is  Christ's  LAW  on  the  subject  of  discipline.  Such  are 
the  powers  and  responsibilities  which  Christ  has  reposed  in  the 
Church.  Who  has  a  right  to  take  them  away  ?  By  what  au- 
thority does  a  Church  of  Christ  ever  surrender  these  powers  and 
responsibilities  into  the  hands  of  Prelates  ?  Can  they  do  it  with- 
out altering  the  very  constitution  which  Christ  has  given  to 
his  Church,  and  trampling  the  fundamental  laws  of  his  kingdom 
under  their  feet  ?* 

and  pronounce  sentence,  according  to  law;  i.e.,  The  power  of  discipline  is,  by  the 
Word  of  God,  reposed  in  the  Church.  He  appears  to  value  his  book  as  the  work 
of  a  lawyer:  but  what  will  lawyers  say  to  the  legal  acumen,  that  can  see  no  dis- 
tinction between  a  "  Canon"  or  general  rule  or  principle  of  law,  and  a  sentence 
awarding  the  penalty  of  that  canon  to  a  particular  transgressor  ?  And  what  will 
the  lawyers  say  to  a  judgment  on  hearsay ;  a  sentence  without  a  trial;  a  sentence  to 
be  executed  without  designating  the  person  ? 

*  Dr.  Hawkes,  in  his  u  Constitution  and  Canons,"  says  that  the  "  Rubrics  "  be- 
fore the  communion  service,  requiring  the  minister  to  repel  evil  livers  from  the  com- 
munion, and  to  give  notice  to  the  Bishop,  is  all  the  provision  for  any  discipline 
upon  ordinary  members  of  the  Church.  He  says,  p.  362,  "  We  know  of  no  other  law 
of  the  Church,  which  practically  reaches  the  case  of  an  offending  layman  but  this ;  and 
there  are  very  few  Dioceses  in  which  any  provisio*n  is  made  by  canon  for  investi- 
gating or  trying  the  case  of  a  layman.  He  must,  therefore,  so  offend  as  to  come 
within  the  terms  of  the  rubric,  or  we  know  not  how  he  is  to  be  disciplined." 

What  usurpation  and  perversion  is  here  !  The  priest's  judgment,  caprice,  or 
will,  without  any  trial  or  defence,  takes  away  one  of  the  dearest  rights  of  Christ's 
people.  The  Bishop  only  can  institute  an  inquiry,  on  complaint  in  writing  by  the 
repelled  party;  and  then  there  are  very  few  Dioceses  in  which  any  provision  exists 
for  investigating  or  trying  the  case  of  a  layman  !  The  layman,  therefore,  has  no 
remedy  but  in  the  good  pleasure  or  mercy  of  his  rector  or  Bishop.  He  can  demand 
nothing  of  right.  A  punishment  which  Christ  did  not  enjoin,  is  to  be  inflicted  by 
an  authority  different  from  that  to  which  Christ  entrusted  the  power  of  discipline; 
punishment  is  inflicted  arbitrarily,  without  trial,  and  in  most  Dioceses  without  any 
method  of  redress  !  Can  there  be  a  more  flagrant  or  fundamental  departure,  in 
matters  of  discipline,  from  the  laws  of  Christ's  house  ?  And  that  Church  talks 
about  dpostolicity,  and  Primitive  order! 


XXIII. 


THE  CHURCH,  AS  TO  EARTHLY  RULE,  A  REPUB- 
LIC, AND  NOT  A  MONARCHY. 

Observation  of  distinguished  Civilians.     Inseparable  connection  between , 
doctrine  and  the  genius  of  government.     Prelacy  incompatible  with 
Christ's  injunctions.     Claim  of  Bishops  to  be  irresponsible  sovereigns. 
Republican  principles  recognized  by  the  Apostles.     Popular  elections. 
Mistake  with  regard  to  the  word  Ordain. 

IT  is  remarkable  how  men  of  comprehensive  views,  and  free 
from  sectarian  bias,  have  agreed  with  regard  to  THE  REPUBLICAN- 
ISM OF  CHRISTIANITY.  "  Christianity,"  says  Montesquieu,  "is  a 
stranger  to  despotic  power."  "  The  religion,"  says  De  Tocque- 
ville,  "  which  declares  that  all  are  equal  in  the  sight  of  God,  will 
not  refuse  to  acknowledge  that  all  citizens  are  equal  in  the  eye  of 
the  law.  Religion  is  the  companion  of  liberty  in  all  its  battles 
and  all  its  conflicts  ;  the  cradle  of  its  infancy  and  the  divine 
source  of  its  claims."  "  The  friends  of  liberty  in  France  are 
accustomed  to  speak  in  enthusiastic  commendation  of  the  Repub- 
licanism of  the  Scriptures."  The  Abbe  de  la  Mennais,  acknow- 
ledged as  one  of  the  most  powerful  minds  in  Europe,  little  as 
he  regards  Christianity  as  a  revelation  from  God,  familiarly 
speaks  of  its  Author  as  "  The  Great  Republican"  Our  own  De 
Witt  Clinton  said.  "  Christianity,  in  its  essence,  its  doctrines,  and 
its  forms,  is  republican."* 

In  the  view  of  Christianity  all  men  are  "  of  one  blood."  Chris- 
tianity extends  its  laws  over  the  rich  and  over  the  poor,  the  peas- 
ant and  the  prince,  the  bondman  and  the  free  alike.  In  its  doc- 
trines, its  demands,  and  its  eternal  retributions,  it  is  a  leveller 
like  the  grave.  There  is  one  way  of  salvation  for  the  Apostle 
and  the  publican.  The  most  exalted  in  the  Church  is  only  "  as 
he  that  doth  serve  ;*'  he  has  no  prerogative  to  come  with  any 
"  Priestly  intervention"  between  the  merest  beggar  and  the 
Throne ;  the  merest  beggar  may  come  and  must  come  before 
the  mercy  seat  for  himself.  So  surely  do  these  doctrines  tend 
to  republicanism,  and  to  break  up  all  spiritual  despotisms,  that  no 

#  These  citations  are  from  Dr.  Spring's  "  Obligations  of  the  World  to  the  Bible." 


300  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Hierarchy,  Protestant  or  Romish,  dares  hold  fearlessly  to  the 
Bible  alone  as  the  rule  of  faith,  and  to  the  doctrine  of  justifica- 
tion by  faith  alone,  to  the  renunciation  of  all  priestly  interventions 
for  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  The  sure  tendency  of  Prelacy  is 
through  Puseyism  to  Popery  :  so  essentially  and  inseparably  are 
the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  connected,  in  the  long 
run  and  on  a  broad  scale,  with  the  genius  of  the  government 
adopted  in  the  Church.  Give  people  the  Bible  alone  for  their 
rule,  and  justification  by  faith  alone,  and  they  will  neutralize  or 
cast  off  the  Hierarchy.  Impose  upon  them  the  dogmas  of 
priestly  interventions  through  a  successional  priesthood,  and  they 
cannot  remain  free.  If  any  one  imagines  this  to  be  mere  theory, 
we  fearlessly  challenge  him  to  point  us  to  any  facts  that  contra- 
dict it  in  the  whole  history  of  Christianity.  Low  CHURCH  AND 
EVANGELICAL  DOCTRINE  GO  TOGETHER.  HIGH  CHURCH  STANDS 

ASSOCIATED    WITH  PuSEYISM    OR  POPERY  THE  WORLD  OVER  J    thus 

it  has  been,  is  now,  and  ever  must  be,  till  causes  shall  be  dis- 
joined from  their  effects,  and  the  world  turn  once  more  to  chaos. 

The  tendency  of  the  true  Gospel  principles  is  to-bring  the 
most  absolute  despotism  under  the  limits  of  law ;  to  imbue  lim- 
ited monarchies  more  and  more  with  the  spirit  of  popular  institu- 
tions ;  to  prepare  the  people  to  govern  themselves  ;  and  finally  to 
establish  everywhere  the  spirit  and  the  reality,  if  not  the  very 
forms  of  a  republic. 

The  great  founder  of  Christianity  seemed  to  have  in  view  this 
elevation  and  ultimate  freedom  of  the  whole  race,  when  he  en- 
joined it  upon  his  disciples  to  "  call  no  man  master ;"  thus 
binding  the  conscience  to  God's  throne,  and  setting  it  free  from 
all  human  domination.  The  great  design  seems  to  be,  like  that 
of  Eden,  to  exalt  and  discipline  the  individual  soul,  and  to  pre- 
pare it  for  citizenship  in  God's  free,  but  holy  and  everlasting 
kingdom.  In  the  same  manner  he  left  his  worship  simple  and 
free;  forbidding  all  his  disciples  to  judge  their  brethren  in 
"  meats  "  or  "  days  ;"  and  by  parity  of  reason,  forbidding  them  to 
judge  each  other,  in  rites  and  forms ;  and  forbidding  all  alike  to 
be  subject,  in  such  matters,  to  the  ordinances  and  commandments 
of  men.  In  the  same  manner,  pointing  to  "  Lordship,"  and  no- 
bility, among  the  nations,  he  said  to  his  Church,  "It  shall  not  be 
so  among  you."  He  carefully  laid  down  such  rules  of  discipline, 
as  leave  the  authority  in  the  hands  of  the  Church;  thus  making 
it  a  republic.  And  surely,  if  any  one  maintains  that  a  brother- 
hood of  Christians,  under  the  few  simple  rules,  and  for  the  sim- 
ple ends  of  Church  government,  are  imcompetent  to  govern  them- 
selves, he  ought  for  ever  to  abandon  the  idea,  that  the  indiscri- 
minate people,  of  an  extended  state,  with  all  the  complication  of 
interests  and  laws  which  come  under  the  purview  of  civil  gov- 


THE   CHURCH  A   REPUBLIC.  301 

ernment,  will  ever  be  competent  to  manage  the  concerns  of  a  re- 
publican government.  If  Christ's  people,  few  and  simple  as 
are  the  ends  of  Church  government,  are  not  competent  to  govern 
themselves  in  Church  estate,  then  the  very  idea  of  republican 
government  ought  to  be  abandoned  in  all  the  earth. 

But  the  very  elements  of  popular  rights  in  the  discipline  and 
government  of  the  Church,  Prelacy  has  taken  quite  away.* 

She  has  subverted  the  very  genius  and  spirit  of  the  polity  of 
the  Christian  Church ;  making  it  a  MONARCHY  instead  of  a  RE- 
PUBLIC. There  are  indeed  some  popular  elements  interwoven 

*  Is  it  the  genius  of  Prelacy  to  invert  all  the  fundamentals  of  Church  polity  laid 
down  in  the  Word  of  God?  Christ  gathers  only  professed  and  apparent  believers 
into  his  Church.  Prelacy  gathers  her  Churches  in  indiscriminate  masses,  by  par- 
ishes and  nations  ;  thus  confounding  the  Church  and  the  world.  Christ  enjoins 
the  duty  of  private  judgment ;  Prelacy  denies  even  the  right.  Christ  enjoins  us  to 
call  no  man  master,  but  to  search  the  Scriptures ;  Prelacy  denies  that  the  Bible 
alone  is  a  safe  or  sufficient  guide  ;  it  binds  us  to  the  traditions  and  interpretations 
of  men.  Christ  forbids  his  disciples  to  be  brought  under  the  yoke  of  bondage,  by 
subjecting  themselves  to  the  ordinances  and  commandments  of  men  ;  Prelacy  frames 
her  canons,  prescribes  her  ceremonies,  garments,  and  postures ;  issues  her  ordi- 
nances, and  if  any  man  will  not  be  subject  to  these,  he  shall  have  no  part  nor  lot  in 
the  Church.  Christ  says,  "Tell  it  to  the  Church."  No,  says  Prelacy,  "  Tell  it  to 
the  Bishop."  Christ  bids  us  depart  from  an  apostle  or  an  angel  from  Heaven 
when  they  preach  another  Gospel ;  Prelacy  forbids  us  to  depart  from  the  Bishop, 
though  he  be  a  limb  of  Antichrist ;  nay,  she  draws  her  life-blood  from  such  a  suc- 
cession, and  counts  it  her  virtue  and  her  glory.  Christ  is  jealous  over  his  people, 
and  fears  "lest  by  any  means,  as  the  Serpent  beguiled  Eve,"  so  their  minds  should 
be  "  corrupted  from  the  simplicity  that  is  in  Christ"  Christ's  Gospel  is  jealous  over 
them  who  are  tempted  to  rely  on  forms,  and  holy  days  ;  "lam  afraid  of  you;  you 
observe  days,  and  months,  and  times,  and  years  ;"  Prelacy  disfigures  the  whole  cal- 
endar with  Saints' days,  Angels'  days,  Lent,  Ember  days,  and  other  arrangements  of 
"  voluntary  will  worship  ;"  she  prepares  her  forms,  and  canons,  and  rituals,  and 
robes,  and  thinks  the  simplicity  that  is  in  Christ,  too  simple  and  bald  ;  and  betters  it 
much,  she  supposes,  by  ceremonials  and  observances  of  her  own  devising. 

Suppose  a  company  of  the  primitive  disciples  could  come  back,  and  by  some 
means  stumble  upon  the  LITURGY  of  the  Episcopal  Church;  turning  over  its 
pages  they  read  such  titles  as  these  :  "  The  Circumcision"  "  Fifth  Sunday  after 
Epiphany"  "  Fourth  Sunday  in  Advent,"  "  Septuagesima  Sunday,"  "  Fifth  Sunday  in 
Lent"  "  Monday  before  Easter"  "  Good  Friday"  "Easter  Even"  "  Tuesday  in  Easter 
week,"  Whitsunday,"  "  Trinity  Sunday,"  "  St.  Stephen's  day,"  "  The  Innocents'  day," 
•'  Annunciation  of 'the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary"  "St.  Peter's  day"  "  ST.  MICHAEL  AND 
ALL  ANGELS,"'"  St.  Simon  and  St.Jude"  "All  Saints'  day"  and  so  on.  and  so  on. 

What  a  strange  spectacle  would  all  this  be  to  these  old  disciples!  Well  might 
they  inquire,  "  What  does  this  mean  ?  Where,  in  the  name  of  wonder,  did  you  get 
all  these  ?  Lent,  Saints'  days,  Angels'  days  T'  Why,  this  is  what  Paul  meant 
when  he  said  to  some  of  our  neighbors  of  old,  "  I  am  afraid  of  you ;  you  observe 
days,  and  seasons,  and  months,  and  years."  Who  could  wonder,  if  these  ancient  dis- 
ciples, reading  here  about  "  St.  Michael's  day,  and  all  angels"  should  call  for  the  old 
epistle  which  they  used  to  hear  read  at  Colosse  ;  and  laying  their  finger  on  the  16th 
verse  should  read  thus  :  "  Let  no  man,  therefore,  judge  you  in  meat  or  drink,  or  in 
respect  of  a,  holy  day"  "  Let  no  man  beguile  you  of  your  reward  in  a  voluntary  hu- 
mility and  worshipping  of  angels!"  "  Wherefore,  if  ye  be  dead  with  Christ  from  the 
rudiments  of  the  world,  why,  as  living  in  the  world,  are  ye  SUBJECT  TO  ORDI- 
NANCES, *  *  after  the  COMMANDMENTS  OF  MEN,  (touch  not,  taste  not, 
handle  not),  Which  things  have  indeed  a  show  of  wisdom,  in  will-worship,  and  hu- 
mility, and  neglecting  of  the  body,  not  in  any  honor,  to  the  satisfying  of  the  flesh." 
How  strange,  too,  it  would  appear  to  these  ancient  Christians,  to  turn  to  the  table 
in  the  front  of  the  Prayer- Book,  and  see  the  "  Church"  gravely  giving  out  "Les- 
sons "  from  the  APOCRYPHA,  to  be  read  as  portions  of  the  Word  of  God. 


302  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

into  the  organization  both  of  the  state  and  general  conventions 
in  this  country  ;  but  they  are  unlike  the  same  system  anywhere 
else  in  the  world,  and  inconsistent  with  its  fundamental  princi- 
ples. They  arose  from  the  necessity  of  making  the  system,  in 
some  degree,  conformable  to  the  popular  sentiments  and  institu- 
tions of  the  American  people  ;  and  they  were  unwillingly  adopted 
by  the  staunch  Prelatists  of  the  day. 

The  Prelatical  principles  are  truly  set  forth  by  Mr.  Chapin  in  his 
recent  work  on  the  Primitive  Church.  Whoever  will  consult 
that  work  (which,  in  Connecticut  at  least,  is  regarded  as  a 
standard  work  on  Episcopacy),  will  find  (p.  175)  that  he  gives 
to  Bishops  "exclusively,"  "the  power  to  judge  in  the  Church." 
(p.  175,  and  p.  32.)  He  makes  them  not  only  Christ's  ministers 
but  Christ's  "representatives"  (p.  33),  maintaining  that  Christ 
has  "  made  over,  or  committed  to  them,  as  by  devise  or  bequest,  the 
kingdom  which  the  Father  had  appointed  or  committed  to  him" 
"that  they  might  sit  on  thrones"  *  *  *  "  judging  (in  a  judicial 
sense)  *  *  the  Church."  (pp.  173, 174.)  All  this  he  builds  upon 
what  he  calls  the  Apostolic  commission  (in  the  sense  of  commis- 
sion to  the  rank  and  office  of  Apostle),  viz.  "  As  the  Father  hath 
sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you."  A  plain  Christian  would  find 
here  no  commission  to  an  official  rank,  but  a  commission  to  ex- 
ecute an  important  ivork,  to  act  as  Christ's  servants,  to  carry  his 
Gospel,  and  proclaim  his  grace.  But  in  the  transforming  hands  of 
Prelacy,  this  rises  into  a  Prelatical  commission,  creating  an  order 
of  viceroys  and  vicegerents !  Our  author  argues  at  length  that  the 
"  even  so"  refers  (not  to  the  sending)  but  to  the  official  rank  and 
headship  of  Christ;  that  the  Bishops  are  vested  with  the  RANK  and 
PREROGATIVES  WHICH  CHRIST  HELD  as  head  and  sovereign  of 
the  Church!  This  he  draws  out  into  formal  particulars  of 
"powers granted  in  this  commission"  1.  Of  preaching.  2.  Of 
baptizing'.  3.  The  power  "  of  admitting  to,  or  rejecting  from  the 
Church."  4.  Of  ordaining'.  5.  Of  kingly  authority  like  that  of 
Ctyrist.  6.  (In  his  own  words),  "  CHRIST  had  power  to  forgive 
sins,  and  he  gave  authority  to  his  Apostles  to  absolve  and  remit 
the  sins  of  repenting  sinners."  7.  Sovereign  power  of  judging 
the  Church,  in  a  judicial  sense.  The  sum  of  the  whole  view  is, 

THAT  WHATEVER  POWER,  PREROGATIVE,  OR  SOVEREIGNTY,  ClIRIST 
HAD  OVER  THE  CHURCH,  HE  TRANSFERRED  IT,  DEVISED  IT,  MADB 
IT  OVER  BY  BEQUEST,  CONFERRED  IT  BY  COMMISSION,  Upon  the 

Apostles;  and  that  sovereignty  the  Bishops  NOW  HOLD.  The 
"  EVEN  so  send  I  you,"  he  holds,  conveys  all.  "  The  commis- 
sion as  it  here  reads,"  says  he  (p.  171),  "  is  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant things  of  which  we  can  conceive,  yet  the  rule  of  construc- 
tion furnished  by  the  Scriptures,  tends  rather  to  enlarge  than  to 
limit  the  powers  granted  in  it"  Surely  if  ever  the  Pope  claimed 


THE  CHURCH   A   REPUBLIC.  303 

more  than  this,  or  made  himself  more  the  "  Vicar  and  Vicege- 
rent of  Jesus  Christ,"  than  is  here  claimed  for  a  Protestant  Dio- 
cesan Bishop,  I  know  not  where  to  find  that  more  extravagant 
claim.  Surely  our  Diocesans  are  not  chargeable  with  making 
claims  too  modest  or  moderate ! 

Thus,  the  Church  is  made  no  more  a  republic,  but  a  sovereign- 
ty, tied  to  an  exclusive  and  indefeasible  succession.  The  world 
has  recently  seen  how  these  claims  are  carried  out  in  practice. 
Bishop  Onderdonk  of  New  York  claims  as  Bishop,  sovereign 
and  divine  right  to  control  and  overrule  the  action  of  a  delibera- 
tive assembly,  whose  whole  constitution  and  organization  and 
functions  are  a  matter  of  conventual  arrangement.  By  virtue 
of  this  divine  right  he  shouts,  "Sit  down,  sir;  not  a  word,  sir;" 
and  the  assembly  reverently  obey  their  master !  Sixty  clergy- 
men go  in  procession  to  congratulate  him  and  to  thank  him  for 
his  manful  vindication  of  his  divine  prerogatives;  and  then 
kneel  down  and  receive  his  Apostolical  benediction  in  return ! 
In  his  address  to  his  convention,  every  inch  a  Bishop,  he  denies 
that  the  clergy,  and  pre-eminently  that  the  Bishop,  owes  "  any 
responsibility  to  the  Church  as  a  body."  In  the  Church,  he 
maintains  that  "Responsibility  *  *  unlike  that  of  human  organiza- 
tions, is  toward  concentration,  not  diffusion."  "  Power  and  pre- 
rogative in  the  Church  came  from  Christ  to  ihe  first  order  in  the 
ministry ;  THENCE  to  the  lower  orders,  and  to  the  brethren  and 
laity  of  the  Church.  As  the  last  gave  no  power  nor  prerogative, 
it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  they  can  demand  responsibility  to 
them  as  a  right"  *  *  "  The  primary  powers  of  the  Church,  then, 
are  not  diffused,  but  concentrated  ;  they  are  NOT  IN  THE  MEMBERS, 
but  Z/ie.HEAD."  This  is  not  merely  the  statement  of  Prelatical 
principles,  by  the  head  of  the  first  Diocese  in  these  United  States ; 
but  it  is  a  correct  statement  of  the  principle,  held  and  avowed  by 
the  universal  Prelacy  of  the  world.  That  is,  The  Church  is  no 
republic,  but  a  monarchy  ;  a  monarchy  not  of  the  people,  nor  by 
the  people,  but  of  Divine  right,  indefeasible,  and  with  no  re- 
sponsibility to  the  people  ;  but  only  a  mutual  responsibility  of 
the  several  sovereigns  of  the  "one  body,"  to  the  sovereigns  in 
conclave. 

"  A  popular  election  to  the  ministry,"  says  the  Bishop  of  Con- 
necticut, "  derives  not  the  least  support  from  the  Scriptures.  *  * 
There  is  no  other  Scriptural  foundation  for  the  sacred  ministry, 
than  that  which  is  contained  in  the  divine  commission  of  the 
Apostles.  From  them  the  authority  is  derived  through  the  suc- 
cession of  Apostolic  Bishops  down  to  the  present  time." 

From  these  dreary  principles  of  spiritual  despotism-  let  us  turn 
once  more  to  the  republican  features  of  the  churches  organized 
by  the  Apostles.  These  churches  had  officers,  which  were  to  be 


304  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

regarded  and  observed,  in  their  proper  sphere,  as  much  as  the 
officers  of  any  other  republic.  But  the  manner  of  their  ruling 
was  not  to  be  as  "  Lords  over  God's  heritage  ;"  "  Whosoever 
will  be  chief  among  you,"  said  the  Saviour,  "  let  him  be  your 
servant." 

The  Apostles  themselves  gave  several  striking  illustrations  of 
their  regard  for  popular  rights.  The  first  public  act  of  the  Church, 
after  our  Lord's  ascension,  was  the  choice  of  an  Apostle  in  the 
place  of  Judas.  Peter  stands  up  in  the  midst  of  the  disciples — 
the  number  of  names  together  was  about  one  hundred  and  twenty 
— and  proposes  the  matter.  The  election  is  made  by  the  body 
of  the  Church. 

Here  is  the  strongest  possible  case.  If  the  people  are  ever  to 
be  passed  by,  in  the  appointment  of  their  ministers,  surely  it 
should  be  so  here.  Yet  this  is  done  by  a  popular  election,  and 
that,  in  the  very  presence,  and  at  the  instance  of  the  Apostles 
themselves :  and  the  Holy  Ghost  records  it  for  our  instruction  in 
such  matters,  if  any  instruction  is  given  on  the  subject.  How 
much  more  is  this  rule  to  be  regarded  in  the  appointment  of  an 
ordinary  minister  ? 

Attempts  have  been  made  to  set  aside  the  plain  record  of  facts 
in  the  first  chapter  of  the  Acts.  Slater,  among  others,  deems  it 
necessary  for  the  cause  of  Prelacy  (as  indeed  it  is)  to  overturn 
the  commonly  received  and  natural  interpretation  of  this  simple 
narrative.  He  contends  that  Peter  is  addressing  the  Apostles, 
and  not  the  brethren  ;  and  that  the  Apostles— not  the  brethren — 
made  the  choice.  I  am  willing  to  refer  the  reader  to  the  record 
for  himself  without  one  word  of  comment.  For  the  satisfac- 
tion of  those  who  believe  in  the  Fathers,  it  is  sufficient  to  ad- 
duce authority  which  good  prelatists  may  not  gainsay :  Chry- 
sostom  says,  "  Peter  did  everything  here  with  the  common  con- 
sent. *  *  He  left  the  judgment  to  the  multitude."* 

Cyprian  confirms  the  exposition  of  Chrysostom.f 

The  appointment  of  Deacons  was  suggested  by  the  Apostles, 
as  it  was  fit  thp.t  inspiration  should  direct  what  officers  were  to 

*  "  The  judicious  HOOKER,"  vol  ii.,  p.  122,  sneers  at  "  the  pretended  right  of  the 
people  to  elect  their  ministers  before  the  Bishop  may  lawfully  ordain ;"  and  declares 
that  by  his  arguments  against  a  popular  election  "  is  drowned  whatsoever  the  peo- 
ple, under  any  pretence  or  color,  may  seem  to  challenge,  about  admission  and 
choice  of  the  pastors  that  shall  feed  their  souls." 

Slater  (p  111)  thinks  that  "reason,  common  sense,  and  experience,  go  against 
popular  elections  ;"  and  that  "  the  will  of  a  few  select  ones  [prelates]  is  safer  than 
the  votes  of  a  mixed  multitude  ;"  declares  that  there  are  "  no  footsteps  of  it  [popu 
lar  elections]  in  the  Holy  code  of  Christ's  laws ;"  and  that  "  not  this  man  but 
Barabbas  is  a  tremendous  instance  of  a  popular  election  in  the  most  eminent  con 
gregation  of  the  only  church  of  God  then  amongst  men."  He  forgets  to  tell  us 
what  hand  the  "  Chief  Priests"  had  in  exciting  this  tumult,  and  in  rejecting  Christ. 
Would  it  have  been  any  better  had  it  bee*  left  to  the  Chief  Priest  alone  ? 

t  Coleman. 


THE  WORD  ORDAIN.  305 

be  established  in  the  Church ;  but  the  election  was  by  the  peo- 
ple.    The  record  is  in  Acts  vi. 

The  same  appears  to  have  been  the  mode  of  electing  Elders, 
or  Pastors.  Paul  and  Barnabas  (Acts  xiv),  passing  through  an, 
extensive  district  of  country,  "ordained  them  Elders  in  every 
church"  Immediately  upon  this  word  ordained,  there  arises 
before  the  mind  of  Prelacy  a  vision  of  some  sacred  rite,  the  com- 
munication of  some  ghostly  virtue  or  power.  But  in  the  original, 
the  word  is  the  one  in  common  use  to  denote  an  election  by  the 
suffrages  of  the  people.  The  Greeks  gave  a  popula/  vole  by 
raising  the  hand:  and  hence  their  word  vote,  or  elect,  is  a  com- 
pound one  of  %EIQ,  the  hand,  and  -cewto,  to  lift.  Thus  Demosthe- 
nes says,  "  The  people  e/e^oTovet,  voted  in  my  proposals ;"  i.  e. 
gave  their  vote  by  lifting-  the  hand.  Every  tyro  in  classic  Greek 
will  remember  the  fable  of  the  birds  assembling  to  elect  a  king ; 
where  the  same  word  is  used  in  the  case  of  one  who  thought 
himself  worthy  TO  BE  ELECTED.  Birds  have  no  hands  to  lift,  but 
the  word  was  so  common  that  it  came  to  signify  an  election  in 
any  mode.  So  Thucydides  says,  "  They  were  at  an  election" 
ZGI.QOTOVM.  Cicero  refers  to  this  manner  of  voting  among  the 
Greeks  :  "  Their  manner  of  voting  is  known,  they  lift  up  the 
hand."  The  same  word  is  used  (ytiyoTOvrfittrtt?)  in  2  Cor.  viii. 
19,  where  Paul  speaks  of  one  who  was  "  chosen  of  the  Church" 
to  travel  with  "  this  grace"  (another  instance  of  popular  manage- 
ment of  Church  concerns).  Here  the  same  word  is  used  as  that 
where  it  is  said  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  ordained:  but  surely  in 
the  present  instance  Prelatists  will  not  contend  that  the  Churches 
conveyed  a  mystical  grace,  or  performed  a  ghostly  ceremony  of 
ordination  ;  they  simply  chose  these  men.  How  then  can  the 
same  word  mean  any  more  when  it  is  said  that  Paul  and  Barna- 
bas ordained? 

The  same  word  %SIQOTOVSM  is  used  in  the  same  sense  by  the 
Fathers.  Ignatius  says  to  the  Philadelphians,  "  It  will  become 
you,  as  the  Church  of  God,  zetgoTovijaat — to  choose  some  deacon  to 
go  there  ;"  again,  "  That  your  Church  appoint,  x^O0™**!0™ — some 
worthy  delegates."* 

This  throws  light  upon  the  nature  of  the  ordination  performed 
by  Paul  and  Barnabas.  They  caused  elders  to  be  appointed,  or, 
as  in  the  margin  of  the  English  translators,  "  When  with  lifting 
up  of  hands  they  had  chosen  them."  TyndaVs  translation  reads, 
"  And  when  they  had  ordained  them  seniors  by  election  in  every 
congregation."  The  ancient  French  version  reads,  "  And  after 
having  by  common  suffrages  ordained  elders."  Beza  reads,  "And 
when  they  had  by  suffrages  created  elders." 

Nothing  in  the  record  refers  to  any  ceremony  of  consecration', 

*  Coleraan,  p.  58 


306  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

nothing  refers  to  the  modern  sense  of  ministerial  ordination ; 
though  Prelacy  is  compelled  to  hang  a  mountain  weight,  upon 
the  notion  that  the  word  ordained  here,  can  mean  nothing  but  a 
mystical  ceremony  of  ordination. 

The  same  remark  applies  with  equal  force  to  the  passage  in 
Titus  i.  5,  "  Thou  shouldest  ordain  elders  in  every  city."  The 
word  translated  ordain  has  no  imaginable  reference  to  any  cere- 
mony or  act  of  consecration ;  in  the  original  it  is  Jtaiaarrja^g — the 
most  general  word  possible  for  establish  (that  thou  shouldest 
establish  elders  in  every  city), without  any  possible  reference  to  any 
particular  mode  of  doing  it ;  least  of  all  any  ceremonial  consecra- 
tion. Doubtless  there  was  a  mode,  or  perhaps  several  modes ; 
but  the  Holy  Ghost  has  not  seen  fit  to  allude  to  any  in  this  con- 
nection. The  presumption  is,  that  whatever  else  was  done,  the 
chief  thing  consisted,  as  in  the  case  of  Paul  and  Barnabas,  in 
calling  the  people  to  a  popular  vote. 

It  is  amusing  to  see  the  immense  weight  that  Episcopacy 
tries  to  hang  upon  such  a  peg  as  the  word  ordain,  in  our  version 
of  the  Scriptures.  It  has  not  there  the  modern  technical  sense, 
but  is  the  common  rendering  of  several  different  words,  none  of 
them  referring  to  an  act  of  consecration  like  a  modern  ordination. 
No  sooner  does  Prelacy  fix  its  eyes  upon  that  word,  than  images 
of  ghostly  virtue,  ghostly  power,  consecration,  awful  mysteries, 
conveyed  by  an  awful  succession,  rise  to  her  view.  But  on 
examining  the  word  in  Titus  i.  5,  we  find  the  same  as  that 
used  (Luke  xii.  14)  where  the  Saviour  says,  "  Who  made  rne 
a  judge  or  a  divider  over  you?"  Surely  here  is  no  reference  to 
a  mystical  consecration.  The  same  is  used  Rom.  v.  19,  "  By 
one  man's  disobedience  many  were  made  sinners."  Surely  it 
was  no  Apostolic  consecration,  no  mystic  ceremony  of  ordination, 
to  make  men  sinners !  Yet  Episcopacy  must  hold  so,  or  she 
must  drop  from  this  peg  on  which  she  has  hung  so  long,  and 
with  such  a  feeling  of  security. 

It  is  admitted  that  the  power  of  electing  their  own  officers  was 
gradually,  and  at  length  entirely  stolen  away  from  the  people  by 
a  grasping  hierarchy,  till  the  last  semblance  of  the  popular  rights 
was  lost.  Yet  it  was  a  long  time  ere  they  were  wholly  lost. 
Clement  of  Rome,  A.  D.  96,  speaks  of  the  appointment  of  minis- 
ters with  the  approbation  of  the  whole  Church,  as  among  the  regu- 
lations of  the  Apostles.*  Cyprian,  A.  D.  258,  says,  "  The  peo- 
ple *  *  ought  to  separate  themselves  from  a  wicked  bishop,  nor 
mix  themselves  with  the  worship  of  a  sacrilegious  priest.  For 
they  principally  have  the  power  of  electing'  worthy  ministers  and 
of  rejecting  the  unworthy;  which  thing  itself  we  see  descends 
from  divine  authority."  As  late  as  A.  D.  437,  Ambrose  of  Milan 

*  Coleman. 


THE  CHURCH  A  REPUBLIC.  307 

was  elected  by  the  people,  of  their  own  accord,  by  acclamation  : 
Martin  of  Tours,  A.  D.  375  :  Chrysostom  at  Constantinople,  A. 
D.  398.  But  there  is  no  need  to  multiply  proofs.  Even  Slater 
admits  (p.  77)  and  uses  the  fact  in  argument,  that  "all  the  breth- 
ren met  together  in  the  Church  to  choose  a  Bishop,  in  the  4th, 
5th,  and  6th  centuries." 

The  accurate  historian  Mosheim  thus  states  the  conclusion  to 
which  his  own  mind  came  after  a  most  thorough  investigation. 
"  In  these  primitive  times,  *  *  the  highest  authority  was  in  the 
people,  or  the  whole  body  of  'Christians ;  for  even  the  Apostles 
themselves  inculcated  by  their  example,  that  nothing'  of  moment 
was  to  be  done  or  determined  but  with  the  knowledge  and  consent 
of  the  brotherhood"  *  *  *  *  "  The  people  did  everything  that  is 
proper  for  those  in  whom  the  supreme  power  of  the  community 
is  vested."* 

Neander,.  the  most  distinguished  ecclesiastical  historian  of  the 
present  day,  says,  "  Each  individual  Church  which  had  a  Bishop 
or  Presbyter  of  its  own,  assumed  to  itself  the  form  and  rights  of 
a  little  distinct  republic  or  commonwealth  ;  and  with  regard  to 
its  internal  concerns,  was  wholly  regulated  by  a  code  of  laws, 
that,  if  they  did  not  originate  with,  had  at  least  received  the 
sanction  of  the  people  constituting  such  Church.f" 

I  need  not  pursue  this  part  of  the  subject  further.  "  Power  is 
always  stealing  from  the  many  to  the  few."  Favors  granted  to 
the  ministers  of  metropolitan  and  other  important  towns,  were 
soon  demanded  as  inherent  prerogatives.  Step  by  step,  corrup- 
tion and  despotism  crept  stealthily  on.  Moderators  and  minis- 
ters of  large  towns  grew  into  Prelates — -into  archbishops,  patri- 
archs ;  till  the  apex  was  at  length  crowned  by  a  Pope. 

We  see  what  principles  are  worth.  The  lessons  drawn  from 
the  history  of  our  fathers  are  corroborated  by  the  history  of  more 
ancient  times :  both  show  the  importance  of  the  principles  for 
which  our  fathers  stood. 

Once  more  we  are  invited  to  enter  the  path  of  Prelacy,  and  of 
the  incipient  corruptions  of  the  Man  of  Sin.  The  beggarly  ele- 
ments of  ancient  despotism  and  superstition  are  again  stalking 
forth,  and  striving,  with  "  high  swelling  words,"  with  lordly 
claims,  and  contemptuous  abuse  of  all  who  refuse  to  receive  their 
yoke,  to  make  their  way  once  more  to  the  empire  of  the  world. 
It  is  not  to  be  disguised  that  the  battle  of  the  Reformation  is  once 
more  to  be  fought  with  those  who  once  gloried  in  the  style  of 
Protestant,  but  who  are  now  beginning  to  be  weary  of  the 
name. 

*  In  Punchard.  t  In  Coleman. 


XXIV. 


OFFICERS  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Extraordinary  functions.  Men  called  to  a  special  work.  Evangelists. 
Deacons.  Bishops.  Presbyters,  or  Pastors.  Singular  error  of  the 
Prayer-Book.  Apostles ;  their  office ;  requisite  endowments. 

WE  read,  Eph.  iv.  11,  that  "  Christ  gave  some,  apostles ;  and 
some, prophets;  and  some,  evangelists;  and  some,  pastors  and 
teachers;  for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ." 

In  1  Cor.  xii.  28,  that  "  God  hath  set  some  in  the  Church ; 
first,  apostles  ;  secondarily, prophets;  thirdly  teachers  ;  after  that 
miracles ;  then  gifts  of  healings,  helps,  governments,  diversities 
of  tongues." 

^  Here  are  men  discharging  some  eight  sorts  of  functions  ;  none 
pretend  these  are  eight  orders  of  permanent  officers  in  the  Church. 
Some  of  these  powers  were  adapted  to  the  special  and  miracu- 
lous establishment  of  the  Gospel.  "  Diversities  of  tongues," 
"  gifts  of  healings,"  "  miracles ;"  there  were  none  to  discharge 
\  these  functions  after  the  Apostolic  age.  These  may  therefore  be 
dismissed  from  our  present  inquiry. 

Evangelists,  as  such,  are  men  specially  called  to  a  special 
work ;  but.  nowhere  recognized  as  officers  attached  to  any 
church.  They  were  men  sent  to  preach  where  Churches  were 
not  formed ;  or  sent  to  complete  the  organization  and  arrange- 
ment of  Churches  where  anything  was  wanting.  Thus  Philip, 
originally  a  deacon,  afterwards  styled  Philip  the  Evangelist,  is 
found  in  the  capacity  of  Evangelist  attached  to  no  Church,  but 
preaching  and  baptizing  in  unevangelized  places  (Acts  xxi.  8). 
Thus  Timothy,  2  Tim.  iv.  5,  is  exhorted  to  "  do  the  work  of  an 
evangelist"  His  work  is  on  all  hands  agreed  to  be  the  same 
with  that,  of  Titus,  who  was  left  in  Crete,  that  he  might  "  set  in 
order  the  things  that  were  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  in  every 
city  :"  the  churches  being  not  as  yet  fully  organized. 

As  Timothy  was  called  to  do  the  work  of  an  Evangelist,  it  is 
plain  that  he  was  not  regarded  as  an  Apostle;  since  Paul  makes 
the  two  offices  distinct  :.  "  some  Apostles,  some  prophets,  some 


OFFICERS  OF  THE  CHURCH.  309 

Evangelists"     If  Timothy  had  been  regarded  as  an  Apostle,  it 
would  have  been  said  to  him,  "  Do  the  work  of  an  Apostle." 

The  officers  recognized  by  the  Epistles  as  permanently  attach- 
ed to  the  several  Churches,  are  BISHOPS  and  DEACONS,  the  Bishops 
being  also  styled  Elders  [Presbyters],  and  Pastors.  Thus,  Paul 
writes  "  To  all  the  saints  in  Christ  Jesus  which  are  at  Philippi, 
with  the  BISHOPS  and  DEACONS."  Had  there  been  a  third,  fourth, 
or  fifth  order  of  officers  attached  to  the  Church,  he  would  not 
have  passed  them  by.  So  in  1  Tim.  iii.  he  sets  down  the  quali- 
fications requisite  for  the  officers  of  the  several  Churches ;  and 
specifies  only  two  sorts,  Bishops  and  Deacons.  He  makes  no 
allusion  to  the  existence  of  any  other. 

In  1  Tim.  v.  17,  Paul  says,  "  Let  the  elders  that  rule  well  be 
counted  worthy  of  double  honor,  especially  they  who  labor  in 
word  and  doctrine"  From  this  many  infer  that  there  were 
elders  who  rule,  but  who  do  not  labor  in  word  and  doctrine ; 
i.  e.  RULING  ELDERS.  In  this  conclusion  the  early  Churches  of 
New  England  agreed  with  the  Presbyterians  ;  but  they  attribut- 
ed to  the  ruling  elders  different  functions  ;  such  as  are  not  incon- 
sistent with  retaining  the  power  of  discipline  in  the  body  of  the 
Church.  In  their  polity,  the  ruling  elder  was  a  sort  of  select-man 
to  look  after  the  affairs  of  Church  rule  and  discipline,  and  to 
present  them  in  due  form  for  the  adjudication  of  the  Church. 

In  addition  to  these  officers.  Episcopacy  maintains  that  their 
DIOCESAN  BISHOPS  are  official  successors  of  the  Apostles ;  and 
in  reality  Apostles ;  only  having,  for  modesty's  sake,  assumed 
the  name  Bishop;  which  was,  in  the  days  of  the  original  Apos- 
tles, exclusively  appropriated  to  the  second  order — the  elders, 
presbyters,  or  pastors.  These  claims  of  Diocesan  Bishops  we 
entirely  deny  ;  maintaining  the  office  of  Diocesan  Bishops  to  be 
an  entire  corruption  and  usurpation,  and  one  fraught  with  im- 
mense mischief  to  the  Church  of  God.  The  reasons  we  shall 
give  in  the  proper  place.  In  the  meantime,  let  us  look  more 
particularly  at  the  unquestionably  permanent  officers  of  every 
Church. 

1.  DEACONS. 

These  were  appointed,  Acts  vi.,  for  the  special  purpose  of  at- 
tending to  the  ordinary  secular  affairs  of  the  Church  ;  and  for 
the  very  reason  that  the  Apostles  might  give  themselves  "  con- 
tinually to  prayer,  and  to  the  ministry  of  the  word"  The  conclu- 
sion is  inevitable,  that  the  deacon's  work  is  not  to  preach.  The 
office  is  permanent.  There  are  deacons  attached  permanently 
to  each  particular  Church  ;  and  those  Churches  have  other  offi- 
cers to  act  as  pastors  and  teachers. 

In  all  these  respects,  Prelacy,  according  to  her  usual  custom, 
sets  herself  to  alter  and  subvert  the  arrangements  set  down  in 


310  THE  PURITANS  AXD  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

the  "Word  of  God ;  she  attaches  the  deacon  permanently  to  no 
Church ;  she  makes  him  a  preacher,  and  sends  him  wandering 
abroad. 

It  is  no  justification  of  this  course  to  allege,  that  Philip  preach- 
ed and  baptized  ;  that  was  not  the  work  for  which  he  was  ap- 
pointed a  deacon  :  when  he  preached  and  baptized,  the  sacred 
record  expressly  styles  him  an  Evangelist. 

2.  BISHOPS  OR  PASTORS. 

That  these  were  "  Elders  who  labor  in  word  and  doctrine," 
all  agree.  Among  the  requisite  qualifications  set  down  for  the 
office  are  these  (1  Tim.  iii.)  :  He  must  be  "  blameless,"  "  vigi- 
lant," "  sober,"  "  of  good  behavior,"  "  given  to  hospitality,"  "  apt  to 
teach,"  "  one  that  ruleth  well  his  own  house,  having  his  children 
in  subjection  with  all  gravity.  For  if  a  man  know  not  how  to 
rule  his  own  house,  how  shall  he  take  care  of  the  Church  of 
God  ?"  Moreover  he  must  be  one  "  Holding  fast  the  faithful 
word,  that  he  may  be  able  by  sound  doctrine  both  to  exhort,  and 
to  convince  gainsay ers  "  (Tit.  i.  9). 

The  requisite  qualifications  point  out  the  duties  of  the  Bishop, 
Pastor,  or  Elder ;  for  these  terms  are  indiscriminately  applied  to 
the  same  office  and  person.  As  an  office  bearer,  he  is  styled 
ELDER  ;  as  charged  with  rule,  he  is  called  Bishop  (overseer,  su- 
perintendent) ;  as  charged  both  with  oversight  and  instruction, 
he  is  styled  Pastor.  These  terms  are  in  the  New  Testament 
indiscriminately  applied  to  the  same  person  and  office.  Thus, 
1  Peter  i.  1-4,  to  the  Churches  "  throughout"  the  several  prov- 
inces of  Asia  Minor :  "  The  elders  which  are  among  you,  I  ex- 
hort, who  am  also  an  elder,  and  a  witness  of  the  sufferings  of 
Christ.  Feed  the  flock  of  God  which  is  among  you,  taking1  the 
oversight  thereof."  The  elders  (presbyters)  he  exhorts  to  feed 
the  flock  (original  noipaweiv—io  do  the  work  of  a  shepherd  or 
pastor) ;  taking  the  oversight  (emaxonowTsg — doing  the  work  of 
bishop).  The  Elder,  then,  is  the  same  as  Pastor,  or  Bishop, 
throughout  all  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor.  Dr.  Scott  makes 
the  following  just  remark  on  the  passage  :  "  This  must  be  allow- 
ed decisive  testimony  that  no  express  distinction  between  pres- 
byters and  bishop  was,  at  the  time  the  Apostle  wrote,  established 
in  the  Church." 

Again  (Acts  xx.),  Paul  being  at  Miletus,  sends  for  the  Elders 
(Presbyters)  of  the  Church  at  Ephesus,  and  says  to  them ;  "  take 
heed  therefore  *  *  unto  all  the  flock  over  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  has  made  you  overseers  "  (emcrxonovg — Bishops)  ;  to  feed 
the  flock  of  God  {no^ta^en — to  do  the  work  of  shepherd,  or  Pas- 
tor}. The  two  Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  entirely  agree  in  mak- 
ing the  Bishop,  the  Presbyter,  the  Pastor,  ONE  AND  THE  SAME 

OFFICE,  IN  ONE  AND  THE  SA.ME  PERSON. 


OFFICERS  OF    THE  CHURCH.  311 

Again  Paul  (Titus  i.  5)  says — "  and  ordain  elders  (Presbyters) 
in  every  city."  Describing  their  qualifications,  he  says,  "  For  a 
Bishop  must  be  blameless ;" — the  Bishop  and  the  Presbyter  are 
one  and  the  same. 

Now  that  word  Bishop,  so  regularly  interchanged  with  the 
word  Presbyter,  is  in  no  instance  interchanged  with  the  word 
Apostle  in  the  New  Testament.  It  was  never,  in  a  solitary  in- 
stance, used  by  the  Apostles  or  their  contemporaries,  to  dignify  a 
Diocesan  Bishop,  or  an  officer,  distinct  from,  and  above,  a  Pres- 
byter. THE  BIBLE  BISHOP,  is  UNIFORMLY  THE  PASTOR,  OR  ONE 
OF  THE  PASTORS,  OF  A  CONGREGATION  ;  never  is  the  name  Bishop 
given  to  a  Diocesan,  or  an  Apostle,  either  by  the  Apostles,  or  in 
the  Apostolic  age.  It  is  absolutely  certain,  that  for  a  hundred 
years  after  Christ,  the  name  Bishop,  whether  used  by  Apostles 
or  Fathers,  signified  the  Pastor  of  a  Church ;  never  a  persou 
holding  a  degree  above  that  office. 

And  yet,  I  apprehend,  that  till  quite  recently,  the  mass  of  the 
common  people,  who  have  entertained  Episcopal  views,  have 
rested  upon  the  name  Bishop,  in  the  New  Testament.  Till  re- 
cently the  mass  of  Episcopalians  have  not  dreamed  that  their 
Diocesans  were  not  Bible  Bishops,  but  veritable  Apostles.  The 
views  of  their  learned  men  were  confused  and  contradictory. 
The  learned  Dr.  Hammond  maintained  that  all  who  bore  the  title 
of  Bishops  or  Presbyters  in  the  New  Testament,  were  Prelates  ; 
and  that  none  of  the  second  order  were  ordained  during  the 
Apostolic  history.  Dodwell  on  the  other  hand  maintained,  that 
Bible  Bishops  were  simple  Presbyters  ;  and  that  no  Prelates  were 
ordained  till  in  the  second  century.  Owen  observed,  two  centu- 
ries ago,  that  "  the  most  learned  advocates  of  Prelacy  begin  to 
grant,  that  in  the  whole  New  Testament,  Bishops  and  Presby- 
ters and  Elders  are  every  way  the  same  persons  in  the  same  of- 
fice," (vol.  xx.,  p.  394).  At  the  present  day,  all  well-informed 
Episcopalians  fully  admit  this  to  be  true.  Thus  Bishop  Onder- 
donk,  in  his  work  on  Episcopacy,  says  (p.  12),  "  It  is  proper  to 
advert  to  the  fact,  that  the  name  Bishop,  which  now  designates 
the  highest  grade  of  the  ministry,  is  not  appropriated  to  that  of- 
fice in  the  Scripture.  That  name  is  there  given  to  the  middle 
order,  or  Presbyters ;  and  all  that  we  read  in  the  New  Testament 
concerning  Bishops  (including,  of  course  the  words  "Overseers," 
and  "  oversight "  which  have  the  same  derivation),  is  to  be  regard- 
ed as  pertaining  to  the  middle  grade.  *  *  *  It  was  after  the 
Apostolic  age  that  the  name  Bishop  was  taken  from  the  second 
order,  and  appropriated  to  the  first,  *  *  '  *  and  when  we 
find  in  the  New  Testament  the  name  Bishop,  we  must  regard  it 
as  meaning  the  Bishop  of  a  parish,  or  a  Presbyter.  The  Bishop 
of  a  diocese,  or  the  highest  grade  of  the  ministry,  we  must  seek 


312  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

there,  not  under  that  name,  and  INDEPENDENTLY  OF  ANY  NAME  AT 
ALL."  *  *  "  The  word  Bishop" —  " in  Scripture,  means  a  PRES- 
BYTER, properly  so  called." 

With  this  view,  Chapman,  Chapin,  Bowden,  and  all  modern 
Episcopal  writers  fully  agree. 

This,  however,  is  a  point  in  which  the  framers  of  the  Prayer- 
Book  were  unfortunately  "  overseen."  In  searching  the  Scrip- 
ture for  something  to  read  at  the  ordination  of  a  Diocesan  Bish- 
op, they  could  find  nothing  to  the  purpose  at  all,  save  one  or  two 
passages  which  use  the  word  Bishop  ;  and  in  which,  it  is  now 
unfortunately  discovered,  that  the  word  signifies  no  diocesan  at 
all,  but  the  simple  Bishop  or  Pastor  of  a  single  Church  ;  a  mere 
presbyter.  But  there  it  stands,  as  the  Epistle  to  be  read  at  the 
ordination  of  a  Diocesan  :  "  This  is  a  true  saying,  if  a  man  de- 
sireth  THE  OFFICE  OF  A  BISHOP,  he  desireth  a  good  work.' 
"  A  BISHOP  then  must  be  blameless."  Or  as  a  substitute  for 
this,  the  passage  in  Acts  xx.  is  set  down,  "  From  Miletus  Paul 
sent  to  Ephesus,  and  called  the  Elders  of  the  Church  ;"  "  And  said, 
take  heed  *  *  to  the  flock  which  the  Holy  Ghost  has  made 
you  overseers^'  (original  enurxonovs — Bishops).  And  our  good 
Diocesans  at  the  ordination  of  a  brother  diocesan— in  full  canon- 
icals and  with  all  gravity,  continue  to  read  these  passages,  as 
though  the  word  Bishop  here  meant  (as  they  know  it  does  not) 
a  diocesan  bishop,  and  not  a  simple  presbyter !  Why  do  they 
do  this '?  Why  do  the  people  suffer  it  ?  Are  they  willing  to 
pass  this  word  Bishop,  knowing  it  to  be,  for  their  purposes,  base 
coin  ?  or  are  they  to  be  slaves,  in  perpetuity,  to  an  old  form, 
which  they  know  is — in  relation  to  the  purpose  for  which  they 
use  it — a  falsehood  ?  or  is  it  because,  forsooth,  some  Scripture 
must  be  had,  and  they  may  as  well  use  this  for  want  of  a  bet- 
ter? Surely,  surely,  if  a  Diocesan  be  such  an  essential  corner- 
stone and  pillar  to  the  very  existence  of  a  Church,  some  Scrip- 
ture ought  to  be  found  which  can,  by  some  decent  pretext,  be 
used  with  some  pertinency  at  his  ordination.  Surely,  surely,  if 
Apostles  had  successors,  it  is  wonderful  that  the  record  should 
be  made  so  abundantly  of  inferior  officers,  but  no  record  of 
the  ordination  of  a  successor  Apostle  !  If  there  is  such  a  record, 
pray  let  us  have  it  in  the  Prayer-Book.  If  there  is  none,  then  tell 
the  people  plainly  at  such  an  ordination,  that  a  deed  is  doing,  for 
which  you  find  no  warrant  or  example  to  read  them  from  the 
Word  of  God. 

3.  APOSTLES. 

These  needed  qualifications  possessed  by  none  since  their 
day.  They  were  appointed,  in  their  peculiar  office,  to  a  work 
which  was  finished  when  they  died.  Their  number  was  limited. 


OFFICERS   OF   THE   CHURCH.  313 

Their  office  was  special,  peculiar  and  personal.     They  could 
have  no  successors. 

1.  They  were  personal  witnesses  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ: 
it  was  essential  that,  as  such,  they  should  have  seen  the  Lord. 

Christ,  speaking  of  his  death  and  resurrection,  said  to  the 
Eleven,  and  "  Ye  are  witnesses  of  these  things."  When  one 
was  to  be  chosen  in  place  of  Judas,  to  fill  up  the  number  twelve, 
Peter  said  (Acts  i.),  "  Wherefore  of  those  men  who  have  compa- 
nied  ivikh  us  all  the  time  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  went  in  and 
out  among  us,  beginning  from  the  baptism  of  John,  unto  the  day 
when  he  was  taken  from  us,  must  one  be  ordained  to  be  A  WIT- 
NESS WITH  us  of  his  resurrection?"  Here  was  one  special  quali- 
fication and  work  of  the  Twelve.  Many  were  personally  cog- 
nizant of  the  facts  pertaining  to  our  Lord's  resurrection  ;  but  out 
of  that  number  must  one  be  ordained,  to  be  with  the  eleven,  a 
witness  (a  special  official  witness)  of  these  things. 

The  case  of  Paul  corroborates  this  view,  "  The  God  of  our 
Fathers  hath  chosen  thee  that  thou  shouldest  know  his  will,  and 
see  that  Just  one,  and  shouldst  hear  the  voice  of  his  mouth.  For 
thou  shalt  be  HIS  WITNESS  unto  all  men,  of  what  thou  HAST 
SEEN  AND  HEARD."  Accordingly,  Paul  himself  says,  "  Am  I 
not  an  Apostle  ?  HAVE  I  NOT  SEEN  JESUS  CHRIST  ?"  Will 
any  modern  Diocesan  venture  to  abide  a  similar  test  of  Apostle- 
ship? 

2.  Apostles,  as  such,  were  endowed  with  miraculous  powers. 
This  Christ  promised  them  ;  this  they  received.     If  it  be   said 
that   others    besides  Apostles  wrought  miracles,  the  answer  is 
plain:  others  may:    but  he  who  claims  to  be  an  Apostle,  MUST. 
For  Paul  says  (2  Cor.  xii.  12) ;  "  Truly  the  SIGNS  OF  AN  APOSTLE 
were  wrought  among  you  in          •  signs  and  wonders  and  mighty 
deeds"     Those  who  pretend  to  hold  the  Apostolic  office  at  pre- 
sent, should  in  all  fairness  be  required  to  show  the  signs ;  other- 
wise it  may  be  said  concerning  them :  "  And  hast  tried  them 
that  say  they  are  Apostles,  and  are  not ;  but  hast  found  them  liars." 

3.  The  Apostolic  office  was  peculiar,  inasmuch   as,  like  the 
Prophets,  they  were  inspired  teachers  of  Divine   Truth.      The 
Holy  Spirit  was  promised,  to  guide  them  into  all  truth,  and  to 
bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance.     On  this  ground,  their 
writings  are  received  as  records  of  the  Holy  Ghost.     If  others 
may  be  inspired,  Apostles  must  be  ;  or  they  are  false  Apostles. 
Surely  our  modern  Diocesans  cannot  claim  this  prerogative;  and 
if  they  should,  some  of  their  writings  constitute  "  another  Gospel," 
the  most  trustworthy  of  their  own  number  being  judges. 

4.  The  Apostles  were  a  limited  number ;  the  "  Twelve  Apos- 
tles"    The  case  of  Paul  specially  and  miraculously  called  and 
qualified,  "like  one  born  out  of  due  time,"  is  the  only  exception. 


314  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

The  appointment  of  Matthias  was  not  to  continue  the  succession, 
but  to  supply  a  substitute  to  one  of  the  Twelve.  Even  if  they  might 
have  successors,  those  successors  should  not  exceed  the  number 
twelve.  But,  besides  filling  a  vacancy  in  the  original  number,  there 
is  no  record  of  appointing  a  single  successor.  When  James 
was  slain  "|who  is  claimed  as  Prelate  of  the  most  important  See 
on  earth),  then  we  should  naturally  look  for  the  appointment  of 
a  successor,  if  successor  there  was  to  be.  But  there  is  none. 
Even  down  to  the  close  of  Revelation,  we  find  allusions  made  to 
The  Twelve.  The  Holy  Jerusalem  (Rev.  xxi.)  has  "  Twelve 
foundations ;  and  in  them  the  names  of  the  TWELVE  APOSTLES 
OF  THE  LAMB." 

5.  When  the  twelve  were  dead,  the  name,  Apostle,  was  applied 
to  no  man  on  earth.  No  man  claimed  to  be  an  Apostle.  No 
man  pretended  to  hold  their  office  for  a  long  time.  The  name 
and  the  office  vanished  away.  Nor  has  there  been  a  time  since, 
when  Prelates  would  dare  to  assume  the  official  title,  though 
they  claim  the  office.  The  common  sense  of  Christendom  is 
against  it.  Apostle  Brownell,  of  Connecticut !  Apostle  Doane, 
of  New  Jersey  !  How  it  sounds  !  Who  ever  heard,  in  Scrip- 
tural times,  of  Apostles  of  particular  Dioceses  ?  WJiitting-ham, 
Apostle  of  Maryland  !  Onderdonk,  Apostle  of  Pennsylvania ! 
Onderdonk,  Apostle  of  New  York  !  The  very  style  is  so  revolting 
and  absurd,  that  to  adopt  it  would  be  death  to  the  prelatical 
claims.  But  if  they  in  reality  hold  the  office,  they  should,  in  all 
conscience  assume  the  name. 


XXV. 


APOSTLES  NO  SUCCESSORS. 

Argument  from  the  name.  Epaphroditus,  Jftdronicus,  Junia.  Argu- 
ment from  the  powers  exercised.  Bishop  Onderdonk's  argument 
examined.  Laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery. 

DIOCESAN  Bishops  claim  to  be  Apostles ;  successors  of  the  Twelve 
in  their  peculiar  office.  Bible  Bishops  they  .confess  they  are  not ; 
if  they  are  .not  veritable  Apostles  they  are  nothing.  We  have 
seen  the  Apostolic  office  to  be,  in  its  ver$*iature,  special  and  tem- 
porary ;  that  though  a  vacancy  was  .  filled  to  complete  the 
number  twelve,  yet  no  record  was  made  of  the  appointment  of 
any  successor ;  which  appointment,  in  tfre  Episcopal  scheme, 
ought  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  important  things,  and  to  have 
appeared  most  fully  and  minutely  on  the  sacred  pages.  We 
have,  therefore,  a  right  to  demand  of  any  who  claim  this  office, 
to  show  that  they  have  seen  the  Lord,  that  they  are  inspired,  and 
that  they  can  work  miracles.  These  are  "  signs  of  an  Apostle," 
which  no  one  who  claims  the  office  should  omit  to  furnish. 

We  will,  however,  attend  farther  to  the  Episcopal  arguments. 
It  is  alleged  ; 

1.  That  others  besides  the  twelve,  and  besides  Paul,  were  called 
Apostles ;  and  that  therefore  both  the  office  and  the  name  were  com- 
mon ;  and  if  so,  then  the  office  was  communicable  and  permanent. 

Thus  Bishop  Onderdonk,  in  his  work,  "  Episcopacy  tested  by 
Scripture,"  contends  that  Sylvanus  and  Timothy  were  called 
Apostles,  and  that,  "  Besides  Andronicus  and  Junia,  others  could 
be  added  to  the  list"  Epaphroditus  and  Barnabas,  it  is  contended, 
are  so  added. 

This  is  nothing  to  the  purpose,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that 
they  are  called  Apostles  in  the  peculiar  and  official  sense.  Even 
Bishop  Onderdonk  elsewhere  argues  largely  that  nothing  is  to 
be  determined  by  the  name ;  that  the  officers,  of  which  he  is  a 
successor,  are  to  be  sought  for  in  the  New  Testament,  "  inde- 
pendently of  any  name  at  all."  Here  the  exigencies  of  Prelacy 
demand  that  something  should  be  made  of  a  mere  name. 

Unfortunately  for  Prelacy,  however,  the  word  APOSTLE  in  its 
primary  and  common  meaning,  signified  one  sent,  a  messenger  ; 


316  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

and  is  so  used  and  so  translated  frequently  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Thus,  certain  brethren  of  the  Church  who  accompa- 
nied Titus  when  he  was  sent  by  Paul  to  Corinth,  are  called 
anoawloi  extdrjaiuv  (literally  Apostles  of  the  Churches)  which  our 
translators  have  very  properly  rendered  "  messengers  of  the 
Churches"  2  Cor.  viii.  23.  Were  these  messengers  official 
Apostles?  Yet  there  is  precisely  the  same  ground  for  contend- 
ing that  they  were  so,  as  for  contending  that  Epaphroditus 
was  an  official  Apostle.  In  Phil.  ii.  25,  Paul  says,  "  I  sup- 
posed it  necessary  to  send  you  Epaphroditus,  my  brother 
and  companion  in  labor,  and  fellow  soldier,  but  your  mes- 
senger" (original,  anoawlov,  the  word  for  Apostle).  Bishop 
Onderclonk  would  correct  our  English  translation,  by  making  it 
read,  " your  Apostle"  Mr.  Chapin,  too,  argues  at  length  that 
Epaphroditus  must  have  been  the  official  Apostle  over  the  Church 
at  Philippi !  No  doubt  it  is  very  important  to  the  cause  of  Epis- 
copacy to  make  him  so  ;  but  the  effort  is  unavailing,  he  was  a 
simple  messenger  sent  out  by  that  Church,  not  an  Apostle  reigning 
over  them.  Our  translation  needs  no  mending  here.  An  official 
Apostle  of  a  single  Church !  Thevery  idea  is  preposterous.  Which 
one  of  the  twelve  Appstles  ever  held  the  office  of  Diocesan  ?  Dr. 
Barrow,  one  of  the  ablest  divines  of  any  age,  has  not  only  largely 
and  conclusively  argued  that  the  Apostles  had  no  successors  in 
their  office,  and  could  have  none,  but  particularly  with  regard  to 
this  point,  has  remarked,  that  to  make  Epaphroditus  Apostle  of 
the  Church  at  Philippi,  and  Timothy  Apostle  of  the  Church  at 
Ephesus,  is  like  "setting  the  king  to  be  Lord  Mayor  of  London, 
or  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  be  Vicar  of  Pancras." 

Besides,  Paul,  writing  an  official  Epistle  to  the  people  of 
another  man's  Diocese  !  that  man  being  an  Apostle  like  himself! 
And  Paul,  telling  that  people,  that  he  had  SENT  their  Apostle ! 
Does  he  ever  do  so  by  Apostle  Peter,  or  Apostle  John,  or  James  ? 
Bishop  Onderdonk  argues  that  we  must  look  for  the  office  inde- 
pendently of  any  name,  and  infer  the  office  from  what  one  does. 
On  this  ground,  what  is  the  office  of  Paul,  while  he  is  sending 
other  Apostles,  writing  them  letters  of  instruction,  and  giving 
them  his  authoritative  charges ;  as  he  does  with  Epaphroditus, 
Titus  and  Timothy  ?  Why,  on  this  ground,  if  Timothy,  Titus 
and  Epaphroditus  are  bishops,  Paul  at  least  must  be  an  Arch- 
bishop,  or  an  JrcA-apostle,  and  so,  that  office  is  clearly  demon- 
strated on  the  Episcopal  ground,  "  independently  of  any  name 
at  all." 

But  it  is  argued  that  ANDRONICUS  and  JUNIA  are  said  to  be 
Apostles.  They  are  not  even  said  to  be  so.  The  passage  referred 
to  in  proof,  is  Rom.  xvi :  7,  "  Salute  Andronicus  and  Junta,  my 
kinsmen,  and  my  fellow  prisoners,  who  are  of  note  among  the 


APOSTLES  NO  SUCCESSORS.  317 


Apostles"  (emarifUH  sv  roicr  artoffToloig),  i.  e.  not  noted  Apostles,  as 
the  Episcopal  argument  makes  them  ;  but  celebrated  among' 
them  ;  themselves  being  no  Apostles  at  all.  Dr.  Scott  takes  the 
common  sense  view  of  the  passage  :  "  Well  known  and  esteemed 
by  the  Apostles" 

What  is  still  more  to  the  purpose  is,  that  this  "  Apostle  Junta" 
who  is  here  made  to  hold  half  the  weight  of  Episcopacy  on  her 
shoulders,  was  beyond  all  proper  question  a  woman.  Our  trans- 
lators accordingly  gave  the  feminine  name  ;  whereas,  had  they 
supposed  Junia  a  man,  they  would  have  made  it  read  not  Junia 
but  Junius.  "  Quce  videtur  fuisse  uxor  Andronici"  says  Rosen- 
miiller  ("  Which  [woman]  appears  to  have  been  the  wife  of  An- 
dronicus"),  "  well  known  to  the  Apostles." 

It  so  happens  that  we  have  proof  of  this,  which  Episcopalians 
must  not  gainsay.  Chrysostom,  Theophylact,  and  several  other 
Fathers  take  Andronicus  for  a  man,  and  Junia  for  a  woman,  his 
wife.  And  both  Greeks  and  Latins  actually  kept  their  festival 
on  the  17th  of  May,  as  husband  and  wife."* 

One  thing  further  in  passing  ;  Bishop  Onderdonk  feels  so 
much  the  need  of  some  help  to  hold  up  this  prop  of  Episcopacy, 
that  he  endeavors  to  lug  in  Calvin  to  his  aid.  After  claiming 
these  to  be  veritable  official  Apostles,  he  adds,  "  Calvin  allows4 
Andronicus  and  Junia  to  be  Apostles  ;"  and  quotes  chapter  and 
verse,  B.  iv.  C.  iii.  §  5.  If  you  turn  to  Calvin  in  that  place,  you 
will  see  that  instead  of  allowing  Andronicus  and  Junia  to  be 
Apostles  in  the  official  sense,  he  affirms  the  contrary  ;  expressly 
denying  that  Apostles  were  instituted  to  be  of  perpetual  continu- 
ance in  the  Church,  but  that  they  were  only  for  that  age  "  when 
Churches  were  to  be  raised  up  where  none  had  existed  before,  or 
were  at  least  to  be  conducted  from  Moses  to  Christ."  Then  fol- 
lows the  passage  from  which  Bishop  Onderdonk  quotes  a  part, 
and  so  grossly  mistakes  its  meaning.  Calvin's  words  are  these  : 
"  So  those  twelve  individuals,  whom  the  Lord  chose  to  promul- 
gate the  first  proclamation  of  his  Gospel  to  the  world,  preceded  all 
others  in  order  and  dignity.  For  although  according  to  the 
meaning  and  etymology  of  the  word  all  ministers  of  the  Church 
may  be  called  Apostles,  because  they  are  all  sent  by  the  Lord, 
and  are  his  messengers  ;  yet  as  it  was  of  great  importance  to 
have  a  certain  knowledge  of  the  mission  of  persons,  who  were 
to  announce  a  thing  new  and  unheard  of  before,  it  was  n?cessary 
that  those  Twelve  together  with  Paul  who  was  afterwards  added  to 
Mieir  number,  should  be  DISTINGUISHED  BEYOND  ALL  OTHERS  BY  A 
PECULIAR  TITLE.  Paul  indeed  himself  gives  this  NAME  to  Andro- 
nicus and  Jama,  who  he  says-  are  of  note  among  the  Apostles  ; 
but  when  he  means  to  speak  with  strict  propriety,  he  never  applies 

*  Dr.  Miller  on  Christian  Ministry,  p.  110. 


318  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

this  name  except  to  those  of  first  order  that  we  have  mentioned. 
And  this  is  the  common  usage  of  the  Scripture."  Calvin,  in- 
stead of  saying  as  Bishop  Onderdonk  represents,  says  directly 
the  contrary.  In  his  commentary  on  the  passage,  Calvin  says, 
"  It  would  be  absurd  to  ascribe  this  great  excellence  in  the  pro- 
per sense  [Apostleship]  to  these  two  believers"  [Andronicus  and 
Junia]. 

Barnabas,  also,  is  alleged  to  have  been  an  official  Apostle  like 
one  of  the  Twelve  ;  because  it  is  said  in  Acts  xiv.  14,  "  which 
when  the  Apostles,  Barnabas  and  Paul  heard  of,  &c."  There  is 
nothing  to  show  that  the  word  Apostles  here  is  used  out  of  its 
common  meaning — "  persons  sent,"  or  Missionaries.  Barnabas 
is  mentioned  with  such  frequency,  that  had  he  been  numbered 
as  an  Apostle,  in  the  official  sense,  it  could  hardly  have  failed 
that  he  should  somewhere  be  recognized  as  such.  But  there  is 
no  remote  intimation  that  he  was  so  considered,  unless  it  be  in 
the  use  of  the  word  (Apostle)  in  this  case.  The  common  (not 
the  official)  sense  of  that  word  is  equivalent  in  some  cases  to 
Messenger;  in  others  to  Missionary.  Now,  strictly  speaking,  by 
Missionary,  we  mean  an  ordained  minister,  sent  to  preach  the 
Gospel  among  the  heathen.  Our  Missionary  boards  accordingly 
mention  such  and  such  persons  as  missionaries,  and  such  and 
such  persons  as  physicians  or  teachers.  But  in  the  narratives 
of  their  labors,  nothing  is  more  common  than  to  speak  of 
them  all  together  as  Missionaries.  ,  If  a  preacher  or  physician, 
and  a  teacher,  should  sail  from  Hawaii  to  Oahu,  or  take  a  tour 
of  either  island,  it  would  be  said  of  them,  The  Missionaries  came 
to  such  and  such  a  place ;  the  missionaries  did  so  and  so.  Would 
it  do  to  hang  the  mountain  weight  of  a  Hierarchy  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  all  of  them  were  ordained  preachers,  because  they 
are  together  spoken  of  as  the  missionaries  ?  Yet  such  is  the  pre- 
cise nature  of  the  Episcopal  argument. 

The  same  remarks  apply  to  the  case  attempted  to  be  made  out 
in  1  Thes.  i.  1,  compared  with  ii.  6.  "  Paul,  Sylvanus,  and  Timo- 
theus  " —  *  *  *  *  "  Nor  of  men  sought  we  glory,  neither 
of  you,  nor  yet  of  others,  when  we  might  have  been  burdensome 
as  the  Apostles  of  Christ"  Prelacy  assumes  that  Sylvanus,  as 
well  as  Timotheus,  was  a  veritable  Apostle ;  forgetting  that  the 
force  of  the  argument  lies  wholly  in  the  word,  which  is  com- 
monly used  in  another  sense,  and  that  in  the  absence  of  all  proof 
that  it  is  used  in  the  official  sense  here,  the  argument  is  not  worth 
a  straw.  Yet,  straw  as  it  is,  Prelacy  is  glad  to  lay  it  in  her  foun- 
dation. 

We  are  now  through  with  the  argument  from  the  name  ;  and 
have  seen,  I  think,  to  borrow  the  words  of  Bishop  Onderdonk — 
that  "  The  name  is  not  worth  a  line  of  controversy." 


APOSTLES    NO    SUCCESSORS.  3 19 

It  is  argued, 

2.  THAT  CERTAIN  PERSONS  ARE  SHOWN  TO  BE  APOSTLES, 
INDEPENDENTLY  OF  ANY  NAME,  FROM  THE  POWERS  THEY  EXER- 
CISED. 

What  is  the  proof?  Timothy  and  Titus  ordained.  Timothy 
and  Titus  (it  is  said)  ruled  the  clergy.  The  sum  of  the  argu- 
ment is  contained  in  these  words  of  Onderdonk's  Episcopacy 
tested  by  Scripture  (p.  26)  ;  "  Is  it  not  evident,  abundantly  evi- 
dent, that  Timothy  had  supreme  power  over  the  clergy  at  Ephe- 
sus,  and  the  full  right  to  ordain  ?  *  *  *  Then,  as  to  Titus, 
examine  his  powers  in  the  island  of  Crete.  *  *  To  him 

are  specified  the  due  qualifications  of  a  Presbyter,  Bishop,  or 
Elder.  His  clear  credential  from  the  Apostle  Paul  is,  "  For  this 
cause,  I  left  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldst  set  in  order  the 
things  that  are  wanting,  and  [that  thou  shouldst]  ordain  elders  in 
every  city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee."  *  *  Again,  "  a  man 
that  is  a  heretic,  after  the  first  and  second  admonition,  [do  thou] 
reject."  "  Ordination,  admonition,  and  rejection  [or  degradation 
and  excommunication]  are  all  committed  to  Titus  personally. 
The  elders,  as  already  seen,  had  no  power  to  reject  those  who 
should  speak  perverse  things,  or  heresy.  Titus  had  that  power. 
All  this  agrees  perfectly  with  the  case  of  Timothy.  And  no- 
thing like  it  can  be  shown  anywhere  in  Scripture  of  any  who 
are  there  called  Elders,  or  Presbyters.  Is  it  not  clear,  that  the 
recorded  powers  of  Titus  make  him  an  officer  of  a  grade  supe- 
rior to  that  which  we  must  assign,  resting  only  on  the  Sacred 
Record,  to  such  elders?  THIS  is  EPISCOPACY." 

I  have  copied  so  much  from  the  work  of  Bishop  Onderdonk, 
because  it  is  the  sum  of  the  argument  as  stated  by  himself.  I 
say  the  sum.  It  embodies  the  POINTS  and  PRINCIPLES  of  the 
whole. 

Neither  admitting  nor  denying  for  the  present,  the  details  on 
which  Bishop  Onderdonk  comes  to  these  conclusions,  let  us  ex- 
amine these  points  and  principles.  If  the  details  do  not  make 
out  these,  they  make  out  nothing ;  if  they  make  them  out,  they 
cannot  go  beyond  them.  Admit  therefore,  for  the  present,  for 
the  sake  of  argument,  that  the  details  justify  these  principles ; 
the  argument  is  answered,  if  the  points  and  principles  themselves 
are  shown  to  be  inconclusive,  and  the  inference  to  be  drawn 
from  a  total  non-sequitur. 

Admitting,  then,  the  whole  that  is  here  alleged,  it  does  not 
prove  Timothy  or  Titus  to  be  an  Apostle. 

I  might  urge  here,  the  facts  already  considered :  that  these  are 
not  officially  styled  Apostles  ;  it  is  not  pretended  that  they  have 
seen  Jesus  Christ ;  they  are  not  inspired  ;  they  do  not  show  the 
miraculous  signs  of  an  Apostle ;  they  are  not  like  the  Twelve,  in 


320  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

any  of  the  peculiar  characteristics  that  designate  an  Apostle. 
But  let  these  things  pass. 

I  say  then,  that  ruling  and  ordaining  are  not  peculiar  to  the 
Apostle  ship. 

1.  Ruling'  is  not :  for  admonition  and  excommunication,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  instead  of  being  committed  to  Diocesans,  as 
Prelatists  falsely  claim,  are  by  Christ  himself  expressly  given  to 
the  Church.  Whatever  is  said  of  the  "  rule  "  of  officers,  it  gives 
them  no  lordship  over  God's  heritage  :  it  only  shows  them  to  be 
possessed  of  ministerial  power;  while  the  authority  is  in  the 
Church. 

But  it  is  said  that  Titus  and  Timothy  RULE  THE  CLERGY  ;  and 
are  therefore  of  a  higher  degree  ;  and  if  of  a  higher  degree  THEY 
MUST  BE  APOSTLES. 

I  answer  (1.)  Nothing  forbids,  that  what  Paul  says  about  "  re- 
ceiving an  accusation  against  an  elder " — may  be  a  simple  in- 
struction concerning  the  matter  of  receiving  accusations  against 
elders,  without  intending  to  designate  the  tribunal  which  is  to  try 
or  depose  them.  The  same  remark  applies  to  the  words,  "  Them 
that  sin,  rebuke  before  all :" — though  it  is  a  mere  conjecture  that 
this  is  spoken  exclusively  of  sinning  elders. 

(2.)  It  is  assumed  that  receiving  and  trying  charges  against  an 
elder,  necessarily  implies  a  superiority  of  rank ;  and  that  an  elder 
cannot  be  tried  and  deposed  without  a  rank  above  him  to  do  it. 
False  and  ridiculous  assumption  :  for  among  Congregationalists, 
Baptists,  Presbyterians,  Reformed-Dutch  and  others,  the  trial  of 
a  minister  is  as  easy,  as  regular,  as  efficient  as  it  is  among  Pre- 
latists or  Papists  ;  and  yet  there  is  no  superior  rank  to  do  it. 

And  who  receive  charges  and  try  them  among  Prelates  them- 
selves ?  Does  it  require  one  of  a  superior  rank  to  try  and  depose 
a  Diocesan  Bishop  ?  Then  must  your  Bishops  be  entirely  irre- 
sponsible, or  else  you  must  have  an  Archbishop,  who  can  be 
nothing  less  to  you  than  an  irresponsible  Pope,  having  no  rank 
above  him,  that  can  receive  charges  against  him  and  bring  him 
to  trial.  So  either  show  us  your  Pope,  or  admit  that  Parity  is  as 
good  as  Prelacy  for  receiving  and  trying  charges  against  Elders  ; 
and  that  on  this  ground,  neither  Timothy  nor  Titus  could  be 
either  Apostle  or  Prelate  at  all. 

The  principle  that  an  officer  cannot  be  tried  and  punished 
without  a  superior  rank  above  him,  draws  as  deep  in  civil  gov- 
ernment as  in  ecclesiastical ;  in  the  latter  case,  it  ends  in  an  irre- 
sponsible Pope,  in  the  former  it  ends  in  a  jure  divino  monarchy, 
as  the  everlasting  destiny  of  all  civil  government.  The  whole 
argument  for  Prelacy  here,  hangs  upon  a  false  assumption. 

To  this  assumption  is  tacked  a  Therefore  :  THEREFORE  Tim- 
othy and  Titus  were  of  a  rank  superior  to  Presbyters.  To  this 


APOSTLES    NO    SUCCESSORS.  321 

tt  therefore"  is  fastened  a  conclusion  that  does  not  follow.  IF  of  a 
superior  rank — THEREFORE  an  Apostle  !  A  string  of  therefores 
is  hung  upon  a  false  assumption,  and  from  the  last  point,  the 
Bishop  leaps  to  a  conclusion  that  does  not  hang  upon  the  chain 
at  all.  The  argument  would  not  lose  one  whit  of  its  logical  ac- 
curacy— had  the  last  link  in  the  chain  read  thus :  Therefore, 
Timothy  was  Pope  of  Rome,  and  Titus  Autocrat  of  all  the  Rus- 
sias.  And  yet,  if  this  logic  be  not  correct — (it  is  one  of  the 
main  pillars  of  the  building) — the  mighty  fabric  of  Episcopacy 
must  tumble  to  the  ground. 

The  instructions  given  to  Timothy  and  Titus  concerning  the 
matter  of  Ruling*,  therefore,  do  not  prove  them  Apostles  ;  and 

2.   The  instructions  given  them  concerning'  ORDINATION  do  not 
prove  them  Apostles. 

(1.)  Where  it  is  said  to  TITUS  (i.  5),  "  and  ORDAIN  elders  in  every 
city"  the  word  in  the  original  (xonaanjar^)  has  no  possible  refer- 
ence to  any  ceremony  or  mode  of  ordination,  but  is  the  most 
general  of  all  possible  terms  for  "  establish"  In  the  case  of  Bar- 
nabas and  Paul,  we  have  already  seen  (Acts  xiv  23),  the  ordina- 
tion spoken  of  was  a  simple  election  (x9*&»wq*rvrist)  1.  e.,  proba- 
bly, as  in  the  choice  of  Matthias,  they  called  the  people  to  choose 
elders.  A  ceremony  of  induction  there  probably  was,  but  the 
Holy  Ghost  appears  to  think  that  of  too  little  consequence  to  put 
on  the  record,  as  it  is  not  noted  here  at  all.  I  have  already  re 
marked  that  the  word  "  ordain"  in  this  direction  to  Titus,  is  the 
same  as  that  used  in  the  passage  "  by  one  man's  disobedience 
many  WERE  MADE  sinners"  (Rom.  v.  19).  There  is  no  more 
reference  to  a  mystic  ceremony  of  ordination  in  the  case  of  Titus, 
than  there  is  of  a  mystic  ordination  to  make  men  sinners. 

(2.)  The  words  used  to  denote  the  ordination  spoken  of  in  the 
New  Testament,  as  if  on  purpose  to  pour  contempt  upon  the 
Prelatic  notion  of  conferring  grace  or  office  by  the  mystic  virtue 
of  ordinaiion,  are  of  the  most  changeable,  various,  and  vague 
character  possible.  Thus,  where  it  is  said  in  the  case  of  Mat- 
thias, "must  one  be  ordained"  the  word  is  yeyeo-0a*,  "must  one 
be,  or  become  a  witness."  Where  it  is  said  that  Christ  is 
"  ordained"  to  be  judge  of  quick  and  dead  (Acts  x.  42),  the  word 
is  fyw^vo?,  fixed  upon,  selected,  appointed.  In  Rom.  xiii.  1,  it  is 
said  that  "  The  powers  that  be,  are  ordained  of  God,"  rciay/u^a*, 
ordered,  appointed. 

(3.)  The  civil  power  is  as  much  ORDAINED  of  God  as  the  clergy  ; 
but  does  it  require  a  superior  rank  to  ordain  [instal  in  office]  a 
civil  magistrate  ?  That  is  the  dream  of  Legitimists,  who  hold  to 
the  divine  right  and  order  of  kings ;  just  as  it  is  of  Prelatists  who 
hold  to  the  succession  of  the  order  of  bishops.  The  Legitimists 
would  not  be  able  to  see  how  the  people  could  ever  confer  an 
21 


322  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

office  which  they  have  not ;  all  power  must  flow  down  from  the 
jure  divitio  monarch,  else  it  could  not  be  a  power  "  ORDAINED  OF 
GOD."  But  whatever  Legitimists  may  think,  we  doubt  not 
that  the  Governor  of  Connecticut,  or  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  is  as  much  a  "  Power  ordained  of  God"  as  any 
other  earthly  potentate  that  ever  existed.  And  the  Governor  or 
President  must  be  ordained  before  his  acts  are  legal.  But  does 
it  require  a  superior  officer  to  induct  the  Governor  or  the  Presi- 
dent ?  Why,  a  simple  justice  of  the  peace  may  ordain  the  one 
or  the  other ;  and  that  without  any  claim  to  an  office  superior  to 
that  of  either. 

(4.)  The  performance  of  any  ceremony  of  ordination,  is  no  mark 
or  peculiarity  of  Apostleship.  In  all  the  instructions  of  our 
Lord  to  the  Apostles,  and  in  all  the  commissions  he  gave  them 
he  said  not  one  word  to  them  about  ordaining.  He  spoke  of 
preaching,  teaching,  and  baptizing,  but  not  of  ordaining.  Had 
this  been  their  great  and  peculiar  work,  it  could  not  have  been 
so  passed  by.  With  Episcopalians,  ordination  is  something 
mystic  and  awful.  Virtue  flows  from  the  ordainer's  hands.  Or- 
dination is  everything.  If  the  ceremony  be  not  performed  by  the 
hands  of  one  who  has  received  the  virtue,  or  virus,  by  a  good 
conducting  medium,  or  succession,  everything  is  lost, — nothing 
is  valid ;  all  who  come  after  that  interrupted  link,  and  all  who 
depend  upon  them,  are  out  of  the  Church  and  destitute  of  all 
claim  to  covenant  mercies.  Nothing  can  exceed  the  care,  mi- 
nuteness, and  circumstantial  pomp  with  which  they  make  their 
records  of  the  ordination  of  Bishops.  But  go  to  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  you  find  nothing  of  the  kind.  The  ORDINATION  of  a 
successor  of  the  Apostles  !  The  New  Testament  is  silent  about 
it.  Christ  said  not  one  word  about  this  (on  the  Episcopal 
scheme)  greatest,  most  stupendous  transaction — >the  ordaining 
of  an  Apostle. 

(5.)  But  it  may  be  said  that  though  the  word  "  ordain,"  in  the 
New  Testament,  has  no  reference  to  any  particular  ceremony 
like  a  modern  ordination,  yet  there  are  passages,  which  show 
that  the  induction  to  office  was  by  the  laying  on  of  hands. 

Grant  it.  By  whose  hands  ?  Does  the  New  Testament  say 
that  it  must  be  by  the  hands  of  an  Apostle  ;  so  that  whoever  may  be 
supposed  to  perform  the  ceremony  of  ordination,  he  must  be  sup- 
posed to  be  an  Apostle?  Nothing  like  it.  The  only  passage 
that  bears  this  reference,  and  that  attributes  the  act  of  ordaining 
to  an  office,  attributes  it  not  to  the  Apostleship,  but  to  the 
Eldership.  Thus,  1  Tim.  iv.  14,  "  Neglect  not  the  gift  that 
is  in  thee,  which  was  given  then  by  prophecy,  with  the  lay- 
ing On  Of  THE  HANDS  OF  THE  PRESBYTERY."  The  hands  of 

a  "  PRESBYTERY"  (or  collection  of  elders),  therefore,  may 


APOSTLES    NO    SUCCESSORS.  323 

ordain;"  and  that  ordination  is  Scriptural.  Admitting,  therefore, 
that  so  Titus  and  Timothy  ordained ;  they  ordained  by  the  lay- 
ing on  of  hands  of  THE  PRESBYTERY,  not  by  virtue  of  Apostleship. 
The  ordaining,  therefore,  cannot  prove  them  Apostles. 

The  shifts  and  windings  to  which  Prelatists  are  driven  on  this 
point,  furnish  some  amusing  specimens  of  the  art  of  shifting  off 
the  force  of  arguments,  that  cannot  be  met  in  direct  encounter. 
You  have  heard  of  the  ancient  Retiarius,  or  gladiator  of  the  net ; 
whose  weapon  was  an  instrument  to  entangle  his  adversary, 
not  to  meet  him  in  fair  and  sturdy  combat.  Bishop  Onderdonk, 
on  this  all  essential  point  of  the  argument,  very  strikingly  resem- 
bles the  ancient  gladiator  of  the  net.  With  regard  to  this  ordi- 
nation of  Timothy  by  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery,  he  first  inti- 
mates, that  it  is  no  ordination  at  all ;  but  the  casual  designation 
of  a  person  already  in  orders  to  a  special  work.  This  ground 
he  first  "  submits  to  the  candid  judgment  of  his  readers ;"  and 
yet  shows  in  the  issue  that  he  himself  neither  rests  upon  it  nor 
believes  it.  Next,  to  "  meet  his  non-Episcopal  brethren  on  their 
own  ground,"  he  is  willing,  for  argument  sake,  to  admit  it  to  be 
an  ordination  ;  but  denies  that  there  was  a  laying  on  of  the  hands 
of  any  Presbytery ;  the  word  Presbyter?/  meaning  Presbyterate^ 
the  office  to  which  he  was  ordained,  not  a  body  of  Elders.  Here 
he  quotes  Calvin  again,  to  sustain  a  position  which  both  himself 
and  Calvin  finally  renounce.  Next  he  argues  that  if  it  be  an  or- 
dination, and  by  Presbyters,  then  the  sort  of  Elders  (or  Presby- 
ters) is  not  designated.  (We  should  have  thought,  in  such  a 
case,  that  it  was  no  matter  what  sort,  provided  they  were  Elders^ 
or  Presbyters.)  He  insists  that  it  might  have  been  a  Presbytery 
of  Apostles;  or  at  least  that  an  Apostle  might  have  been  present, 
from  whose  hands  the  virtue  of  the  ordination  might  have  pro- 
ceeded. At  last  he  comes  upon  the  ground  where  Episcopalians 
commonly  rest ;  that  it  was  an  ordination;  that  the  Presbytery 
was  composed  of  real  Presbyters  ;  and  that  it  is  so  recognized 
by  Paul ;  "  who,''  he  says,  "  makes  the  following  distinction  in 
regard  to  his  own  agency  and  that  of  others  in  this  supposed  or- 
dination ;  by  the  putting  on  of  my  hands,  WITH  the  laying 
on  of  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery."  Such  a  distinction,  he  says 
(p.  22),  "  may  be  justly  regarded  as  intimating  that  the  virtue  of 
the  ordaining  act  flowed  from  Paul,  while  the  Presbytery,  or  the 
rest. of  the  body,  if  he  was  included  in  it,  expressed  only  con- 
sent" 

If  we  follow  the  steps  of  Bishop  Onderdonk,  through  the  sev- 
eral positions  which  he  assumes,  we  must  come  to  the  following 
conclusions  with  regard  to  this  ordination  of  Timothy.     It  was 
an  ordination,  and  it  was  not  an  ordination  ;  there  was  a  laying 
•  on  of  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery,  and  there  was  not  a  laying  on 


324  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

of  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery  J  Presbytery  means  Presbyterate 
and  no  body  of  men,  and  again  it  means  u  body  of  men  and  no  Pres- 
byterate  ;  the  body  was  made  up  of  Apostles,  and  it  was  not 
made  up  of  Apostles,  but  of  Presbyters  ;  the  ordination  was  by 
the  hands  of  the  Presbytery,  because  perhaps  an  Apostle  or 
Apostles  might  have  been  among  them  ;  and  again  it  was  not 
by  the  hands  of  the  Presbytery,  the  virtue  flowed  from  Paul, 
while  the  Presbytery  only  gave  consent.  Truly,  Bishop  Onder- 
donk  must  get  out  of  his  own  net  as  he  can.  No  man  of  his 
unquestionable  capacity,  in  such  a  studied  and  deliberate  trea- 
tise, would  have  taken  so  many  inconsistent  positions,  had  he 
seen  any  firm  and  inpregnable  ground. 

The  "  BY  "  and  "  WITH,"  two  little  particles  which  constitute 
the  final  ground  for  Prelacy  to  rest  on  here,  are  in  two  separate 


Epistles,  1  Tim.  iv.  14,  [*e™  emdrjaeMg  iuv  XeiQuv  —  (with  the  laying 
on  of  hands)  ;  and  2  Tim.  i.  6,  "  That  thou  stir  up  the  gift 
of  God  which  is  in  thee  by  (<?"*)  the  putting  on  of  my  hands." 
Chapin  puts  the  two  passages  together,  and  mak'es  them  read 
thus:  "By  the  putting  on  of  my  hands,  with  the  hands  of  the 
Presbytery.  Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  this,"  he  says,  "  The 
ordination  was  by  the  Apostle,  with  the  concurrence  of  the 
Presbytery."  On  this  I  remark  : 

(1.)  It  admits  the  act  to  be  an  ordination,  and  the  body  to  be 
composed  of  simple  Presbyters  ;  since  they  only  concur. 

(2.)  It  assumes  that  the  two  passages  refer  to  the  same  act  ; 
whereas  the  gift  of  God  by  the  putting  on  of  Paul's  hands  might 
have  been  no  appointment  to  office,  but  gifts  of  miraculous  power  ; 
which  Paul,  again  and  again,  was  the  instrument  of  conferring 
on  others  by  the  laying  on  of  his  hands. 

(3.)  Even  admitting  the  two  records  to  refer  to  the  same  act  ; 
Paul,  in  the  first,  deems  it  a  sufficient  account  to  speak  of  the 
laying  on  of  the  hands  of  Presbytery.  Presbyters,  therefore,  ar^ 
all  that  is  needed.  But  : 

(4.)  The  criticism  about  meta  and  dia  (pera  and  Sia)  is  both 
erroneous  and  contemptible  ;  too  weak  a  peg  to  hang  a  rush 
upon,  and  yet  here  it  must  bear  the  mountain  weight  of  Episco- 
pacy, or  Episcopacy  must  tumble  to  the  ground.  Dr.  J.  M. 
Mason  so  thoroughly  exploded  this  criticism,  that  it  was  forty 
years  ere  Episcopacy  ventured  to  revive  it  again.  "  Be  it  so," 
says  Mason,  "  be  it  so,  that  meta  and  dia  are  contrasted  ;  the 
first  simply  denoting  concurrence,  and  the  last  the  efficient  cause, 
Be  it  so.  I  open  my  New  Testament  and  read  that  "  Many- 
signs  and  wonders  were  done  by  (dia)  the  Apostles.  Proceed- 
ing in  the  narrative,  I  read  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  rehearsed  all 
things  which  God  had  done  (meta)  WITH  them,  i.  e.,  in  the  case 
of  miracles  wrought  by  Peter  and  James,  Peter  and  James 


APOSTLES  NO  SUCCESSORS.  325 

were  the  efficient  cause,  or  the  conductors  of  the  Divine  power : 
but  in  the  case  of  miracles  wrought  by  Barnabas  and  Paul,  they 
only  acted  in  concurrence ;  meta  and  dia  being  words  used  in  con- 
trast, to  show  that  the  first  had  power  and  authority  to  work  mi- 
racles, the  last  only  power  to  act  in  concurrence  !" 

I  do  not  see  but  that  the  Prelatical  argument,  from  the  powers 
exercised,  dies,  though  in  the  last  ditch.  It  has  veered  and  shift- 
ed, and  finally  betaken  itself  for  shelter  in  the  last  resort  to  sim- 
ple meta  and  did,  which  turn  out  to  be  no  shelter  at  all ;  but  after 
every  evasion  and  shift,  the  brethren  of  the  Church  ruled^  and 
Presbyters  ordained:  nor  is  the  receiving  of  a  complaint  against 
an  elder,  nor  the  act  of  ordaining,  any  mark  of  Apostleship 
at  all. 


XXVI. 


DIOCESAN  BISHOPS. 

Timothy  not  Diocesan  of  Ephesus.  The  Angels  of  the  Churches  were 
no  Diocesan  Bishops.  No  change  of  official  designation  from  Apostle 
to  Bishop. 

IT  is  contended,  that  Timothy  was  Diocesan  Bishop,  that  is, 
Jlpostle,  of  Ephesus.  But  the  New  Testament  shows  that  Tim- 
othy was  notoriously  an  itinerant,  going  from  field  to  field,  and 
not  a  stationary  officer  of  any  special  district.  To  this,  our  Epis- 
copal brethren  reply  that  Timothy  was  a  Missionary  Bishop,  at 
least  so  long  as  his  journeyings  continued.  A  Missionary 
Bishop!  A  Missionary  Apostle!  Does  the  New  Testament 
recognize  such  a  thing  as  a  stationary  Apostle — the  Apostle  of  a 
single  Church  or  Diocese  ? 

Paul  says  to  Timothy,  "  I  besought  thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephe- 
sus." The  inference  is  inevitable  :  he*  was  not  by  his  peculiar 
office  permanently  stationed  there.  Daille  has  well  remarked ; 
"  To  beseech  a  man  to  abide  in  a  place  where  his  charge  assigns 
him  to  be,  and  which  he  cannot  forsake  without  offending  God, 
and  neglecting  his  duty,  is,  to  say  the  truth,  not  a  very  civil  en- 
treaty ;  as  it  plainly  supposes  that  he  has  not  his  duty  much  at 
heart." 

There  is,  however,  very  plain  proof  from  Scripture,  that  Tim- 
othy was  not  Bishop  of  Ephesus  at  all.  If  he  ever  was  so,  it 
must  have  been  when  the  first  Epistle  of  Paul  was  written  to 
him  :  for  the  sole  argument  that  he  was  so,  is  built  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  this  Epistle  was  written  to  him  in  capacity  of 
Bishop  [Apostle]  of  Ephesus. 

But  some  time  after  that  Epistle  was  written,  Paul  (a  little 
before  his  being  sent  prisoner  to  Rome)  returns  through  Macedo- 
nia to  Asia,  "  bound  in  the  Spirit  unto  Jerusalem"  (Acts  xx.).  In 
the  4th  verse,  it  is  specially  recorded  that  Timothy  was  with  him. 
Coming  to  Miletus  (v.  17),  Paul  sends  to  Ephesus  for  the  elders 
of  the  Church,  and  when  they  are  come,  he  gives  them  the 
solemn  charge  recorded  in  Acts  xx.  18-35.  In  Timothy's  pre- 
sence, Paul  sends  for  these  elders :  Paul  charges  them.  He  says 
not  a  word  about  Timothy,  or  any  other  Diocesan.  This  is  alto- 


TIMOTHY  NO    DIOCESAN.  327 

?  ether  unaccountable  on  the  notion  that  Timothy  is  their  Bishop 
Apostle].  Why  does  not  Timothy  send?  Why  does  not 
Timothy  charge  these  elders  ?  He  is  their  Apostle  !  the  equal  of 
Paul.  *Why  does  not  he  greet  his  own  Presbyters,  from  whom 
he  has  been  so  long  absent  ?  Why  does  Paul  interfere  in  his 
brother  Apostle's  special  Diocese  ? 

It  is  so  plain  that  Timothy  is  not,  at  this  time,  their  Diocesan 
Bishop,  that  even  Bishop  Onderdonk  concedes  it ;  "  Ephesus," 
says  he  (p.  25),  "  was  without  a  Bishop  when  Paul  addressed 
the  elders  ;  Timothy  not  having  been  placed  over  that  Church, 
till  some  time  afterwards."  But  if  Timothy  was  not  at  this  time 
their  Diocesan,  he  never  was.  If  you  turn  to  1  Tim.  i.  3.,  you 
will  see  that  Paul  left  Timothy  at  Ephesus,  when  he  himself 
went  into  Macedonia ;  and  in  chap.  iii.  14,  we  learn  that  Paul 
expected  to  return.  "  These  things  I  write,  hoping  to  come  unto 
thee  shortly :  But  if  I  tarry  long,  &c."  And  chap.  iv.  13,  "  Till 
I  come,  give  attendance  to  reading,  &c."  The  evidence  is  con- 
clusive that  the  Epistle  was  written  when  Paul  expected  to  re- 
turn to  Ephesus.  But  how  was  it,  when,  being  at  Miletus  (Acts 
xx.),  he  sends  for  the  Ephesian  Elders  and  gives  them  their 
charge  ?  It  is  his  final  charge.  "  And  now  behold  I  know  that 
ye  all,  among  whom  I  have  gone  preaching  the  kingdom  of  God, 
shall  see  my  face  no  more  "  (Acts  xx.  17).  "  And  they  all  wept 
sore,  and  fell  on  Paul's  neck  and  kissed  him,  sorrowing  most  of 
all  for  the  words  which  he  spake  that  they  should  see  his  face  no 
more."  And  they  did  see  him  no  more.  He  went  to  Jerusa- 
lem ;  was  apprehended ;  sent  as  a  prisoner  to  Rome,  and  died  a 
martyr. 

This  renders  it  certain,  that  his  interview  with  the  Ephesian 
Elders  recorded  in  Acts  xx.  was  after  the  Epistle  to  Timothy  was 
written.  But  it  is  both  proved  and  conceded,  that  at  the  time  of 
that  interview  with  the  Ephesian  Elders,  Timothy  was  not  Bishop 
of  Ephesus.  The  conclusion  is  inevitable  :  Timothy  never  was 
Bishop  of  Ephesus:  and  nothing  in  the  Epistle  to  Timothy  can 
bear  the  slightest  possible  allusion  to  the  work  of  a  Diocesan 
Bishop.  This  main  prop  and  pillar  of  Episcopacy  must  needs 
tumble  to  the  ground.* 

The   search  after  Diocesan  Bishops  in  Apostolic  times,  now 

*  "  Theodoret  and  Athanasius  among  the  Fathers  affirm  this  early  date  of  the  First 
Epistle  to  Timothy.  Baronius,  Ludovic,  Capellus,  Blondel,  Hammond,  Grotius, 
Lightfoot,  Benson,  Doddridge,  and  Michaelis  affirm  it.  Townsend  says,  "  I  can  ad 
mit  no  theoretical  argument  to  overthrow  what  seems  to  me  the  unforced  deduction 
from  Scripture,  that  the  Epistle  was  written  after  St.  Paul  went  from  Ephesus,  and 
left  Timothy  there  when  he  went  into  Macedonia." 

i:  Episcopalians  have  been  challenged  to  produce  a  single  passage  from  the  writ- 
ings of  the  Fathers  for  the  first  three  centuries,  in  which  Timothy  or  Titus  are 
recognized  as  Bishops  in  the  prelatical  sense ;  and  the  challenge  remains  unan- 
swered to  this  day."  "  Chrysostom  acknowledges  them  to  be  Evangelists."  (Pu- 
seyite  Episcopacy,  by  J.  Brown,  D.D.) 


328  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

comes  to  a  narrow  comer  of  the  field.  Bishop  Onderdonk,  the 
modern  Goliath  of  Episcopacy,  first  bids  us  look  for  veritable 
Apostles,  other  than  the  Twelve,  bearing  the  Apostolic  name ; 
Apostle  Andronicus,  Apostle  Junia,  Apostle  Epaphroditus ;  we 
have  looked,  and  find  no  Apostles  there.  He  next  bids  us  look 
for  Apostles  without  the  name,  and  independently  of  any  name 
at  all ;  we  have  looked,  and  they  are  not  there.  Where  now 
shall  we  look  for  men  bearing  the  Apostolic  office  after  the  death 
of  the  Twelve  ? 

Shall  we  look  for  them  under  the  name  of  Bishops  ?  No  :  it 
is  conceded  that  they  are  not  yet  to  be  found  under  that  name. 
Every  Church,  in  city  and  in  country,  has  its  Bishop,  who  is 
everywhere  known  by  that  name  ;  but  he  is  admitted  to  be  a 
simple  pastor,  and  no  successor  of  the  Apostles  in  their  peculiar 
office. 

Shall  we  look  for  them  under  the  name  of  Apostles  ?  There 
is  no  man,  bearing  that  name,  anywhere  on  the  face  of  the  earth. 

Where  then,  in  the  name  of  wonder,  are  they  ?  It  is  passing 
strange  that  this  office,  on  which  the  very  existence  of  the  Church 
depends,  should  be  known  by  no  distinctive  name  !  Why,  every 
poor  pastor,  every  deacon  and  deaconess,  bears  a  well  known 
official  title.  Is  there  none  for  that  first  order  in  the  Church  ? 
Do  they  move  about,  in  every  province  and  city,  bearing  the 
burden  and  rule  of  all  the  Churches,  and  while  Deacons  and 
Bishops  are  every  day  referred  to  by  name,  is  there  no  trace  ex- 
tant, upon  the  whole  earth,  of  any  reference  to  this  high  order  of 
functionaries  ? 

O  certainly,  replies  Bishop  Onderdonk  ;  you  will  find  them 
under  the  name  of  ANGELS  OF  THE  CHURCHES.  Hear  him  (p. 
262) :  "  The  dignitaries  in  question  were  addressed  when  it  was 
somewhat  too  late  to  call  them  Apostles,  and  too  soon  to  call 
them  Bishops;  particularly  as  the  latter  word  had  a  different 
meaning  in  the  Scriptures  already  written.  Another  designation 
therefore  is  given  them  ;  they  are  called  angels  ;  and  the  kind  of 
office  is  left  to  be  inferred  from  the  powers  and  distinctions  given 
them."  "  The  name  Bishop  was  in  transitu  from  the  second  or- 
der to  the  first." 

To  this  I  reply  (1.)  That  there  is  no  proof  that  the  name 
Bishop  was  undergoing  a  change.  The  allegation  that  it  was 
so,  is  entirely  gratuitous  and  untrue.  About  A.D.  100  Clemens 
Romanus  uses  the  word  Bishop  as  it  is  used  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment ;  to  signify  the  simple  Pastor  of  a  congregation.  This  is 
admitted  by  Slater  (p.  18),  who  maintains  that  a  different  use  of 
the  word  Bishop  was  first  made  by  Ignatius  in  the  second  cen- 
tury. We  do  not  admit  that  it  was  made  even  then ;  but  the 
proof  is  complete,  that  the  name  Bishop  was  not  now  in  a  pro- 


NO  CHANGE  OF  OFFICIAL  DESIGNATION.  329 

cess  of  change,  from  pastors  to  those  who  were  formerly  called 
Apostles.  For  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era,  there  is  no 
evidence  that  the  name,  Bishop,  meant  anything  else  than  it  did 
in  the  days  of  the  Apostles ;  and  four  hundred  years  passed  away 
before  any  one  ventured  to  assert  that  those  were  called  Bishops 
who  were  once  called  Apostles. 

(2)  The  supposition  is  absurd.  In  the  process  of  a  gradual 
change  of  name,  there  will  be,  for  a  time,  an  intermingling  of  the 
old  name  with  the  new ;  but  never  in  such  a  gradual  change 
was  it  heard,  that  for  a  while  it  is  too  early  to  use  the  new 
name  and  too  late  to  use  the  old ;  and  that,  therefore,  a  third 
name,  distinct  from  either,  is  introduced  to  soften  down  the  pro- 
cess of  the  change. 

But  the  case  is  still  worse  in  the  case  supposed  by  Bishop 
Onderdonk.  He  will  have  it  that  the  Christian  world  is  studded 
all  over  with  real  Apostles,  bearing  that  name.  There  is  Apostle 
Timothy,  Apostle  Epaphroditus,  Apostle  Andronicus,  Apostle 
Junia,  and  Apostle  who  not,  besides.  While  this  is  so,  every 
congregation  in  every  city,  village  and  hamlet,  has  its  pastor, 
who,  the  world  over,  is  styled  a  Bishop.  Presently,  and  ere  the 
volume  of  revelation  closes,  the  Apostles  are  all  gone ;  all,  save 
the  last  of  the  Twelve  in  Patmos.  No  man  anywhere  bears  the 
name  Apostle.  It  is  "  too  late "  to  call  any  man  an  Apostle ; 
but  unfortunately  for  the  argument  of  Bishop  Onderdonk,  the 
world  is  full  of  Bishops,  who  are  all  simple  Pastors ;  and  it  is 
too  early  to  call  an  Apostle  by  the  name  of  Bishop. 

Now  how  is  this  double  change  effected  ?  How  is  it  that  the 
Apostles  everywhere  give  up  their  own  name,  and  everywhere 
filch  away  the  names  of  the  Bishops,  and  yet  no  trace  or  frag- 
ment of  this  double  change  can  be  found,  in  the  history  of  the 
whole  world  for  four  hundred  years  ?  If  the  process  of  change 
is  so  universally  going  on,  it  must  somewhere  appear.  But  it 
does  not.  Writings  are  abundant :  a  trace  of  almost  everything 
else  appears  in  them  :  but  no  trace  or  fragment  of  such  a  change 
can  anywhere  be  found.  The  very  life  of  Episcopacy  hangs 
upon  the  certainty  of  such  a  change;  but  it  brings  no  proof; 
it  is  obliged  to  rest  upon  a  baseless,  unreasonable,  impossible 
assumption. 

(3.)  It  is  alleged  that  during  this  process  of  change,  Apostles  are 
designated  neither  as  Apostles  nor  as  Bishops,  but  under  the 
style  of  "  Angels  of  the  Churches."  If  this  were  so,  then  "Angels 
of  the  Churches"  would  be  very  common  affairs :  we  should  find 
mention  made  of  them  at  every  turn.  But  the  word  Angel  is  in 
no  other  instance  used  in  this  sense  in  any  writing  sacred  or 
profane.  Episcopacy  is  driven  here  to  find  an  Apostle  in  the 
angel  of  the  Church.  If  an  Apostle  is  not  here  he  is  confessedly 


330  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

nowhere.  He  is  nowhere  called  Apostle  ;  he  is  nowhere 
called  Bishop.  It  is  too  late  for  the  one,  and  too  early  for  the 
other.  Episcopacy,  therefore,  as  a  last  resort,  fastens  upon  the 
angels  of  the  Church.  She  guesses  that  they  are  Diocesan  Bish- 
ops,— for  if  not  there,  where  can  they  be?  She  guesses,  that 
each  one  of  these  seven  Churches  must  be  a  Diocese  of  several 
congregations ;  and  that  the  angel  presided  over  the  clergy  of  the 
several  congregations !  It  is  all  guess-work,  without  a  particle 
of  proof;  but  with  the  acknowledged  fact  that  "  angel  of  the 
Church"  nowhere  else  means  a  bishop,  in  all  the  writings  of 
man  !  Other  people  guess  that  these  angels  were  Presbyters ; 
others  again  guess  that  they  figuratively  represent  the  whole 
body  of  the  church  ;  since  the  Spirit  says  to  one  of  these  angels, 
"  Behold,  the  devil  shall  cast  some  of  you  into  prison."  Light- 
foot  guesses  that  the  angel  of  the  Church  was  something  answer- 
ing to  the  Chazan  of  the  Jewish  Synagogue,  who  took  care  of 
the  reading  of  the  law,  and  who  sometimes  preached ;  but  who 
was  far  enough  from  being  the  type  of  a  Diocesan  Bishop.  If  I 
might  be  allowed  to  add  my  guess,  I  should  guess  that  the 
angel  of  the  Church  is  no  officer  at  all;  but  that  the  use  of  the 
word  is  figurative ; — one  of  the  images  in  that  highly  figura- 
tive book.  We  have  an  angel  in  the  sun  ;  an  angel  stand- 
ing on  the  sea  and  on  the  earth  ;  angels  coming  down  with 
chains.  I  should  guess,  that  the  addresses  to  angels  of  the 
Churches  are  only  figurative  modes  of  addressing  the  Churches 
themselves.  Indeed,  after  these  messages  to  the  angels,  it  is 
added,  "  He -that  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear  what  the  Spirit 
saith  unto  THE  CHURCHES."  And  in  making  this  guess,  I  do  it 
in  very  good  company,  for  Stillingfleet  says  (Irenicum,  p.  315), 
"  Why  may  not  the  word  Angel  be  taken  only  by  way  of  repre- 
sentation of  the  body  itself?  either  of  the  whole  Church,  or,  which 
is  far  more  probable,  of  the  consessus  or  order  of  Presbyters  in 
that  Church  ?  We  see  what  miserably  unconcluding  arguments 
those  are,  which  are  brought  for  any  form  of  government  from 
metaphorical  or  ambiguous  expressions,  or  names  promiscuously 
used,  which  may  be  interpreted  in  different  senses  ?  What  cer- 
tainty, then,  can  any  rational  man  find,  what  the  form  of  govern- 
ment was  in  the  primitive  times,  when  only  those  arguments 
are  used  which  may  be  interpreted  in  different  senses.  And 
without  such  certainty,  with  what  confidence  can  men  speak 
of  a  divine  right  to  any  one  particular  form  ?" 

Here  Episcopacy  again  hangs  her  whole  weight  upon  what 
Stillingfleet  well  calls,  "a  miserably  unconcluding  argument" 
She  has  conceded  that  if  her  Diocesan  Bishops  are  not,  at  this 
time,  found  under  the  name  of  angels  of  the  Churches,  they  are 
not  to  be  found  under  any  name  upon  the  face  of  the  earth.  It 


NO  CHANGE  OF  OFFICIAL  DESIGNATION.  331 

is  too  late  to  call  them  Apostles ;  it  is  too  early  to  call  them 
Bishops.  It  is  not  pretended  that  they  are  at  this  period  called 
anything  if  not  angels.  It  is  certain  that  they  are  not  so 
called  anywhere  save  in  this  passage  of  the  book  of  Revelation ; 
and  it  is  a  baseless,  unreasonable  conjecture  to  suppose  that  they 
are  so  called  here. 

After  this  book  of  Revelation,  it  is  certain  that  these  high 
functionaries,  the  successors  in  the  office  of  the  Apostles,  are  not 
called  angels  of  the  Churches.  Nor  are  they  called  Apostles. 
For  a  hundred  years,  the  pastors  of  Churches  everywhere 
monopolize  the  name  of  Bishops.  Where,  in  the  name  of 
wonder,  are  these  Diocesan  successors  of  the  Apostles  ?  There 
is  no  trace  of  them  after  the  "  angels,"  till  more  than  a  century 
afterwards  they  come  out  Bishops!  A  double  change  of  title 
occurs,  in  two  orders  of  Church  officers ;  a  change  involving 
some  confusion  and  mingling  of  terms ;  it  occurs  in  thousands 
of  instances,  in  many  languages,  all  over  the  world,  and  no  trace, 
no  fragment  indicative  of  that  change  remains  !  A  body  of  men 
nowhere  alluded  to  by  any  distinct  name,  move  noiselessly  about, 
bearing  on  their  shoulders  the  supreme  authority  of  the  Churches  ; 
till  at  last  they  have  everywhere  filched  away  the  names  of  the 
second  order  in  the  ministry,  and  no  trace  or  fragment  of  this 
double  change  remains. 

But  it  is  said  that  there  is  testimony  to  the  fact  of  such  a 
change,  though  the  process  of  the  change  cannot  be  traced. 
"  It  was  after  the  Apostolical  age,"  says  Bishop  Onderdonk, 
"  that  the  name  Bishop  was  taken  from  the  second  order  and  ap- 
propriated to  the  first,  as  we  learn  from  Theodoret" 

Well,  who  is  Theodoret  ?  A  man  who  lived  in  the  fifth  cen- 
tury !  No  hint  or  trace  of  such  an  opinion  ever  has  been  cited 
before  him.  On  what  authority  does  Theodoret  say  this  ?  Does 
he  allude  to  any  record,  any  memorial,  or  even  any  tradition  ? 
None  at  all.  It  stands  on  his  conjecture,  bare  and  unsupported  ; 
an  unreasonable  and  absurd  conjecture,  about  a  thing  concern- 
ing which  all  proof  is  wanting,  and  that,  too,  when  proof  could 
not  be  wanting,  were  the  thing  itself  true.  Episcopacy  thus 
hangs  her  monstrous  claims  upon  a  conjecture  unsupported, 
unreasonable  and  absurd ;  and  this  conjecture  of  Theodoret 
concerning  a  matter  of  which  he  knows  nothing,  Episcopacy 
calls  his  testimony !  TESTIMONY  !  about  a  thing  which  he 
neither  saw  nor  read  of;  and  which  if  it  had  ever  taken  place, 
must  have  taken  place  two  or  three  centuries  before  he  was 
born !  If  it  did  not  take  place  four  centuries  before  he  was 
born,  Episcopacy  is  a  demonstrable  perversion  of  the  institutions 
of  Christ  and  his  Apostles. 

Prelacy  must  needs  take  the  laboring  oar  here.     Let  her  tell 


332  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

when  or  how  this  double  change  occurred.  Let  her  explain  how 
it  could  possibly  occur,  and  no  trace  or  fragment  remain  to  indi- 
cate the  process.  Let  her  tell  by  what  name  these  successors  in 
the  Apostolic  office  were  known ;  or  where  they  lurked,  when 
for  one  hundred  years  they  were  neither  Apostles,  nor  Angels, 
nor  Bishops ;  and  how  it  was  possible  that  this  nameless  body  of 
Prelates  could  so  entirely  escape  the  observation  or  notice  of 
all  writers  for  so  long  a  time.  Let  Prelacy  explain  these  matters 
to  us  ;  or  let  her  frankly  admit  that  the  pretended  change  never 
occurred,  but  that  ambitious  parish  Bishops,  in  favorable  situa- 
tions, gradually  assumed  more  and  more,  till  they  became  Pre- 
lates ;  metropolitans  grew  up  by  degrees  into  Archbishops  and 
Patriarchs  ;  till  at  last,  this  gradual  stealing  of  power  from  the 
many  to  the  few,  brought  forth  the  Pope  ;  while  Pope,  Patriarch, 
Archbishop,  and  Diocesan,  are  alike  unknown  and  unauthorized 
in  the  Word  of  God. 


XXVII. 


PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS. 

WE  have  now  searched  clear  down  through  the  Scriptures, 
and  find  not  a  trace  or  fragment  of  Episcopacy.  The  supposi- 
tion, to  which  the  advocates  of  the  scheme  are  obliged  to  resort 
in  order  to  maintain  that  it  had  any  existence  in  the  first  age 
after  the  Apostles,  we  have  seen  to  be  absurd  and  impossible. 
Beyond  this  point,  we  are  bound  to  receive  nothing.  We  are 
not  bound  to  inquire  any  further :  we  are  already  beyond  the 
Apostles  and  Apostolic  times.  In  all  propriety,  the  argument 
should  end  here. 

But  we  will  not  end  here :  we  are  willing  to  follow  the  preten- 
sions of  Prelacy  to  her  haunts  and  strongholds,  in  the  deep  tan- 
gled wild-wood  of  the  Fathers,  and  to  see  what  sort  of  resting- 
place  she  possesses  even  there. 

And  first,  as  to  the  nature  of  the  authority  to  be  allowed  to 
the  Fathers.  We  are  willing  to  admit  them  as  witnesses  to  mat- 
ters of  fact  existing  in  their  own  day,  and  corning  under  their 
own  observation,  so  far  as  any  testimony  can  be  ascertained  to  be 
really  theirs,  and  not  a  forgery  or  an  interpolation.  Secondly, 
when  they  conjecture  merely,  as  Theodoret  does,  without  refer- 
ring to  any  record  or  even  to  any  tradition,  we  are  willing  to 
weigh  even  their  conjectures ;  especially  when  they  give  reasons 
for  the  same.  But  thirdly,  as  authoritative  interpreters  of  Scrip- 
ture, we  know  them  not.  It  is  said  indeed,  that  we  must  receive 
their  opinions  and  interpretations,  or  reject  the  Bible  ;  but  we 
beg  leave  to  dissent  from  this ; — a  man  may  be  a  good  witness 
of  the  authenticity  of  a  document,  when  he  would  make  a  most 
miserable  interpreter  of  its  meaning.  And  it  may  be  affirmed, 
without  any  danger  of  contradiction,  that  nowhere,  among  Shak- 
ers, Swedenborgians,  or  Mormons,  can  there  be  found  interpre- 
tations more  crude,  or  monstrous,  than  are  everywhere  rife  in  the 
writings  of  the  boasted  Fathers. 

And  now,  let  the  Fathers  advance  and  give  their  testimony: 
The  first  who  comes  upon  the  stand  is  Clemens  Romanus. 


334  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

He  is  supposed  to  be  the  Clement  mentioned  by  Paul.  He 
wrote  an  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  about  A.  D.  96.  It  is  the 
earliest  and  most  authentic  of  all  the  writings  of  the  Fathers. 
His  object  in  writing,  was  to  conciliate  the  minds  of  the  Corin- 
thians to  their  Pastors,  some  of  whom  they  had  rejected  from  the 
ministry.  Throughout  his  epistle,  he  calls  these  ministers  Pres- 
byters, and  speaks  of  the  people  having  expelled  them  ano  -n?? 
EnTaxoTtyg  from  the  Episcopate  (the  office  of  Bishop).  He  uses 
the  words  Pastors  and  Bishops  repeatedly  and  throughout,  as 
synonymous.  This,  Slater  admits  ;  and  the  learned  Dr.  Camp- 
bell says,  "  No  critic  ever  questioned  "  it. 

But  let  Clemens  speak  for  himself.  "  The  Church  of  God 
which  sojourneth  at  Rome  to  the  Church  of  God  which  is  at 
Corinth."  (Why,  this  seems  not  a  lordly  Diocesan  writing  to  a 
Diocese,  but  very  much  like  the  minister  of  a  congregation 
writing  in  the  name  of  the  people  to  a  sister  Church.)  But  read 
on.  "  The  Apostles  have  preached  to  us  from  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ ;  Jesus  Christ  from  God.  Christ,  therefore,  was  sent  by 
God,  the  Apostles  by  Christ ;  so  both  were  orderly  sent  accord- 
ing to  the  will  of  God.  For,  having  received  command,  and 
being  thoroughly  assured  by  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  convinced  by  the  Word  of  God,  with  the  fulness  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  they  went  abroad  publishing  that  the  kingdom 
of  God  was  at  hand.  And  thus  preaching  through  countries 
and  cities,  they  appointed  the  first  fruits  of  their  conversions,  to 
be  Bishops  and  Deacons  over  such  as  should  afterward  believe, 
having  first  proved  them  by  the  Spirit ;  for  thus  saith  the  Scrip- 
ture in  a  certain  place,  I  will  appoint  their  overseers  [Bishops]  in 
righteousness,  and  their  Deacons  in  faith." 

Here  we  have  everywhere,  in  cities  and  country  places,  Bish* 
ops  and  Deacons,  in  each  place  or  congregation  ;  and  with  Cle- 
mens as  with  Paul,  a  Bishop  is  the  simple  Pastor  of  a  Church. 

Clemens  goes  on  to  show  how  Moses,  to  prevent  all  dispute 
about  the  priesthood,  referred  the  matter  to  God  ;  when  Aaron's 
rod  alone  blossomed.  "  So  likewise,  our  Apostles  knew  that 
there  should  contentions  arise  upon  the  name  of  the  Bishopric, 
and  therefore,  having  a  perfect  knowledge  of  this,  they  appointed 
persons  as  we  have  before  said,  and  gave  directions,  how,  when 
they  should  die,  other  and  approved  men  should  succeed  in  their 
ministry;  who  were  either  appointed  by  them,  or  afterwards 
chosen  by  other  eminent  men,  with  the  consent  of  the  whole 
Church.  For  it  would  be  no  small  sin  in  us  should  we  cast  off 
these  from  their  Episcopate  [Bishopric],  who  nobly  and  without 
blame  fulfil  the  duties  of  it.  Blessed  are  those  Presbyters,  who 
having  finished  their  course  before  these  times,  obtained  a  per- 
fect and  fruitful  dissolution.  For  they  have  no  fear  lest  any  one 


PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS.  335 

should  turn  them  out  of  the  place  which  is  now  appointed  for 
them."  *  *  *  *  "  It  is  a  shame,  my  beloved,  yea,  a  great 
shame,  and  unworthy  your  Christian  profession,  to  hear,  that  the 
most  firm  and  ancient  Church  of  the  Corinthians,  should  by  one 
or  two  persons  be  led  into  a  sedition  against  its  Presbyters.  * 
*  *  *  Do  ye,  therefore,  who  first  laid  the  foundations  of  this 
sedition,  submit  yourselves  to  your  Presbyters" 
"only  let  the  flock  of  Christ  be  in  peace  with  the  Presbyters 
that  are  set  over  it." 

In  this  discourse,  speaking  expressly  about  the  ministry,  its 
appointment  and  succession,  Clemens  recognizes  only  two  orders, 
Bishops  and  Deacons ;  and  he  uses  the  words  Bishop  and  Pres- 
byter as  synonymous,  meaning  the  same  identical  office,  as  be- 
longing to  the  same  identical  "men  (just  as  we  have  seen  the 
words  to  be  uniformly  used  in  the  New  Testament). 

It  is  therefore  certain,  that  both  at  Rome  and  at  Corinth,  the 
name  Bishop  has  yet,  undergone  no  change  from  its  original 
signification.  The  Bishop  is  still  the  simple  pastor  of  a  Church ; 
Presbyter  being  used  as  the  title  of  honor  [Elder],  and  Bishop 
[overseer]  being  the  name  of  office. 

If  there  had  been  a  Diocesan  over  these  "  Presbyters,"  whom 
the  Corinthians  were  rejecting  from  "the  Episcopate,"  how- 
strange  that  Clemens  did  not  mention  him  ;  how  impertinent  in 
that  case,  for  Clemens  to  write  at  all !  How  passing  strange  that 
Clemens  should  say  so  much  about  these  Presbyters  coming 
in  succession  from  the  Apostles,  and  forget  to  say  one  word 
about  their  Diocesan,  if  they  had  one ! 

Will  it  be  said  that  their  Diocesan  is  dead  ;  and  that  Clemens 
is  writing  as  their  provisional  Diocesan  ?  But  he  writes  not  as 
Diocesan,  or  in  his  own  name  at  all ;  it  is  the  Church  of  Rome 
writing  to  the  Church  of  Corinth ! 

Ask  Clemens,  while  he  is  on  the  stand,  whether  he  ever 
knew  the  title  Bishop  to  signify  an  office  superior  to  that  of 
Presbyter,  i.  e.,  one  holding  the  official  rank  of  Apostle.  He  is 
silent  as  the  grave  :  he  knows  nothing  about  it.  Ask  him,  if  he 
knows  of  any  such  things  as  Angels  of  Churches,  so  called,  who 
in  his  day  were  in  reality  Apostles.  He  knows  nothing  about  it. 
Ask  him  if  such  an  order  of  men  exists,  with  or  without  a  name, 
whom  it  is  too  late  to  call  Apostles,  and  too  early  to  call  Bish- 
ops ;  he  knows  nothing  about  it,  save  that  "  everywhere,"  in 
cities  and  in  country  places,  at  "  Rome  and  in  Corinth,"  a  Bishop 
is,  like  the  New  Testament  Bishop,  the  Pastor,  or  Presbyter 
(Elder)  of  a  Church,  i.  e.,  of  a  congregation  of  Christians. 

But  Prelatists,  nevertheless,  claim  Clemens  as  proving  for  them 
three  orders  instead  of  two.  Let  us  notice  this  claim.  It  will 
serve  as  a  fair  specimen  of  the  way  in  which  Prelatical  writers 


336  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

delude  each  other,  and  mislead  their  people  by  mistaken  inter- 
pretations of  the  Fathers.  Perceval,  in  his  famous  book  on 
Apostolic  succession  (p.  54).  cites  this  epistle  of  Clemens  thus  : 
"  It  will  behoove  us,  looking  into  the  depths  of  divine  knowledge, 
to  do  all  things  in  order,  whatsoever  our  Lord  has  commanded 
us  to  do.  He  has  ordained  by  his  supreme  will  and  authority, 
both  when  and  by  what  persons,  they  [the  sacred  services  and 
oblations]  are  performed.  For  the  chief  priest  has  the  proper 
services,  and  to  the  Priests  their  proper  place  is  appointed,  and 
to  the  Levites  appertain  their  proper  ministries  ;  and  the  layman 
is  confined  within  the  bounds  of  what  is  appointed  to  lay- 
men." 

Perceval  cites  this  with  the  express  design  of  making  those 
who  read  him,  believe  that  Clemens  applies  the  term  Chief 
Priest,  Priests,  and  Levites,  to  three  orders  in  the  Christian 
ministry  ;  and  here  he  leaves  it.  He  passes  entirely  by  the  plain 
testimony  of  Clemens  concerning  the  identity  of  Presbyters  and 
Bishops  ;  but  he  adduces  this  passage  as  proof  positive  of  three 
orders,  and  especially  of  the  Diocesan  Bishop.  Sure  enough, 
people  who  read  Perceval,  and  who  are  not  aware  of  his  bare- 
faced trickery  in  this  quotation,  will  naturally  conclude  that 
Clemens  acknowledges  three  orders  in  the  Christian  ministry. 

But  Clemens  is  not  speaking  here  of  the  Christian  ministry 
as  existing  in  three  orders  :  he  is  drawing  an  argument  for  or- 
derly proceeding-  among  Christians,  from  the  consideration  of 
the  regard  to  order  observed  in  the  Jewish  sacrifices  and  priest- 
hood: and  immediately  after  the  sentence  quoted  by  Perceval,  he 
makes  the  application :  "  Let  every  one  of  you,  therefore,  bless 
God  in  his  proper  station,  with  a  good  conscience,  and  with  all 
gravity,  not  exceeding  the  rule  of  his  sacrifice,  which  is  appoint- 
ed to  him.  The  daily  sacrifices  are  not  offered  everywhere,  nor 
the  peace-offerings,  nor  the  sacrifices  appointed  for  sins,  but  only 
at  Jerusalem." 

Why  did  not  the  Hon.  and  Rev.  Mr.  Perceval,  Chaplain  to 
the  Queen,  tell  his  readers,  like  an  honest  man,  that  he  had 
suppressed  the  true  testimony  of  Clemens,  and  made  a  gross 
perversion  of  his  words,  in  the  quotation  which  he  gave  ? — that 
he  was,  in  this  instance,  dealing  wholly  in  false  pretences  ;  and 
that  if  they  understood  the  words,  Chief  Priest,  Priest  and  Levite, 
in  this  passage,  to  refer  to  three  orders  in  the  Christian  minis- 
try, they  must  also  conclude  that  Christian  ministers  offered 
daily  sacrifices, peace-offerings,  and  sin-offerings,  and  that  only  at 
Jerusalem?  And  if  Perceval  was  not  honest  enough  to  tell  the 
truth  in  this  matter,  why  does  the  American  Protestant  Episcopal 
Tract  Society  still  persist  in  scattering  that  Tract,  on  the  wings 
of  the  wind,  without  one  word  of  correction,  and  that,  so  long 


PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS.  337 

after  this  piece  of  arrant  fraud  has  been  so  clearly  and  unanswer- 
ably pointed  oat  by  Powell  in  his  work  on  Apostolical  succes- 
sion ?* 

The  words  of  Stillingfleet  on  the  testimony  of  Clemens  Ro- 
manus,  are  worthy  to  be  repeated  ;  "  They  that  can  find  any  one 
single  Bishop  "  [Diocesan]  at  Corinth,  at  the  time  when  Clemens 
wrote  his  epistle  to  them  *  *  "  must  have  better  eyes  and  judg- 
ment than  the  deservedly  admired  Grvtius,  and  he  was  a  great 
friend  of  Episcopacy,  who  brings  this  in  his  epistle  toBignonius,  as 
an  argument  of  the  undoubted  antiquity  of  that  epistle,  that  Cle- 
ment nowhere  mentions  the  singular  authority  of  Bishops,  which 
by  Church  customs,  after  the  death  of  Mark,  at  Alexandria,  be- 
gan to  be  introduced :  but  Clement  clearly  shows,  as  did  the 
Apostle  Paul,  that  then  by  the  Common  Council  of  the  Presby- 
ters (who  both  by  Paul  and  Clement  are  called  Bishops)  the 
Churches  were  governed." 

Milner,  though  an  Episcopalian,  also  admits  the  force  of  this 
absolute  proof  of  Clemens.  "  At  first  indeed,"  says  he,  "  and  for 
some  time,  Church  governors  were  only  of  two  ranks,  Presbyters 
and  Deacons.  The  Church  of  Corinth  continued  long  in  this 
state,  as  far  as  one  may  learn  from  Clement's  epistle."  "  And 
Faber  says,  here  we  may  observe,  no  more  than  two  orders  are 
specified ;  the  word  Bishops  being  plainly  used  as  equipollent 
to  the  word  Presbyters :  and  all  possibility  of  misapprehension 
is  avoided  by  the  circumstance  of  Clement's  affirmation  that  the 
appointment  of  these  TWO  ORDERS  ivas  foretold  in  prophecy.  * 

Had  the  Church,  in  Clement's  time,  universally  acknow- 
ledged and  believed  that  three  distinct  orders  of  clergy  had  been 
appointed,  that  Father  could  never  have  asserted  such  a  form  of 
polity  to  be  foretold  in  prophecy,  which  announced  the  appoint- 
ment of  no  more  than  two  sorts  of  officers." 

I  trust  it  is  now  clear,  that  in  Clement's  day,  Episcopacy  had 
no  existence.  There  was  no  name  for  such  an  officer  as  a  Dio- 
cesan Bishop :  no  allusion,  no  fragment  bears  the  least  trace  of 
his  existence. 

Let  us  next  call  JUSTIN  MARTYR,  who  suffered   A.  D.  165. 

*Mr.  Chapin,  in  his  work  on  the  Primitive  Church,  stumbles  into  this  ditch  dug 
by  Perceval :  I  cannot  for  a  moment  suppose  that  he  knowingly  concurs  in  so  gross 
a  piece  of  deception.  He  quotes  (pp.  232  and  244)  the  same  passage  as  proof  from 
Clemens  of  three  orders  in  the  ministry.  He  passes  by  and  suppresses  the  real  tes- 
timony of  Clemens  on  the  matter  in  question  ;  and  adduces,  as  testimony,  a  pas- 
sage not  relating  to  the  Christian  ministry  at  all,  but  only  to  the  Jewish  Priesthood. 

There  is  one  piece  of  acumen,  however,  which  appears  to  belong  exclusively  to 
Mr.  Chapin.  Clemens  had  said  that  the  Apostles  "  preaching  in  cities  and  coun- 
tries," appointed  "  everywhere  Bishops  and  Deacons ;"  using  the  terms  in  the  genuine 
New  Testament  sense.  This  is  too  naked.  It  will  indicate  that  Bishops  are  still, 
everywhere,  Pastors  of  Churches,  with  no  change  in  the  meaning  of  the  word  Bishop. 
>Ir  Chapin  avoids  this  by  a  new  translation ;  making  Clement  read,  "  They  ap- 
pointed OVERSEERS  and  ministers''  (instead  of  Bishops  and  Deacons). 


338  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

He  speaks  of  two  orders  in  the  ministry,  and  of  two  only ; 
though  expressly  treating  of  the  Church,  its  institutions,  its  offi- 
cers, and  worship.  He  speaks  repeatedly  of  the  (^wecno^)  Presi- 
dent of  the  brethren,  and  of  the  Deacons ;  describing  the  Presi- 
dent as  leading  the  congregation  in  prayer  (which  by  the  way 
he  describes  as  extemporary  and  not  liturgical) — as  setting  apart 
the  bread  and  wine,  while  the  deacons  distribute  the  same.  It 
is  evident  that  his  President  is  simply  the  Pastor  of  a  congrega- 
tion :  and  so  far  as  appears  from  the  writings  of  Justin,  he  is 
entirely  ignorant  of  such  a  thing  as  a  Diocesan  Bishop. 

Call  the  next  witness  in  order:  POLYCARP,  of  a  date  some 
half  century  later  than  Clemens  Romanus.  Polycarp  has  been 
familiar  with  the  immediate  disciples  of  our  Lord.  His  epistle 
was  in  such  respect,  among  Primitive  Christians,  that  it  used  to 
be  read  publicly  in  their  churches  till  the  fourth  century.  "This 
valuable  relic,"  says  Coleman  (p.  165),  "  harmonizes  in  a  remark- 
able degree  with  that  of  Clement,  in  recognizing  but  two  orders 
of  the  clergy."  "  Polycarp  and  the  Presbyters  with  him  to  the 
Church  of  God  dwelling  at  Philippi" — If  you  turn  to  the  Epistle 
of  Paul  to  the  Philippians,  you  will  see  that  he  addresses  the 
Bishops  and  Deacons.  Polycarp  in  like  manner  mentions  but  two 
orders,  Presbyters  and  Deacons.  Coleman  has  justly  remarked 
(p.  166),  that  "  If  there  were  three  orders  of  clergy  at  Philippi,  the 
omission  of  one  by  the  Apostle,  and  another  by  this  Apostolical 
Father,  is  unaccountable."  Polycarp  exhorts  the  Church  to  be 
subject  to  the  Presbyters  and  Deacons.  He  intimates  nothing 
concerning  any  higher  officer.  The  conclusion  is  inevitable,  that 
the  words  Bishop  and  Presbyter  are  still  used  interchangeably,  as 
they  were  in  the  days  of  Paul. 

Here  we  have  Clement  and  Polycarp,  cotemporaries  and  sur- 
vivors of  the  Apostles,  one  at  Rome,  the  other  at  Smyrna,  in  dif- 
ferent languages,  in  portions  of  the  Church  widely  separated, 
agreeing  in  making  Bishops  and  Presbyters  the  same :  and 
speaking  in  such  terms  as  to  preclude  the  supposition  that  they 
know  anything  of  any  higher  officer. 

But  Prelatists  still  endeavor  to  press  'Polycarp  as  a  witness 
for  their  cause.  Can  you  imagine  how  it  is  done  ?  In  a  very 
ingenious  way  indeed.  It  you  turn  to  Chapin  on  the  Primitive 
Church  (pp.  229,  230),  you  will  see  how  the  thing  is  done. 
He  conjectures  that  the  Bishop  of  Philippi  is  dead ; — as  well 
he  may  be,  since  (non  est  inventus)  he  is  not  to  be  found.  Upon 
this  hook,  he  hangs  another  conjecture ;  that  the  Church  in  Phi- 
lippi in  Europe,  being  a  Church  without  a  Bishop, — may  have 
invited  Polycarp  of  Smyrna  in  Asia,  to  exercise  a  temporary 
and  provisional  Episcopacy  over  them.  No  history  shows  it : 
Polycarp  does  not  intimate  any  such  thing  :  no — but  the  exigen- 


PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS.  339 

cies  of  Episcopacy  require  it ;  and  so  by  virtue  of  two  good 
broad  guesses, — as  broad  as  The  ^Egean  sea, — Polycarp  is  very 
conveniently  installed  provisional  and  temporary  Bishop  of 
Philippi :  and  that,  before  the  days  of  steam-ships  or  magnetic 
telegraphs ! 

If  we  do  not  allow  this  guess-work  to  be  substantial  proof  of 
the  claims  of  Episcopacy,  then  we  have  come  down  into  the 
second  century,  and  nearly  through  it,  and  not  only  has  the  word 
Bishop  undergone  no  change  of  meaning  such  as  is  pretended  ; 
not  only  is  there  no  name  as  yet  for  such  a  thing  as  a  Diocesan 
Bishop ;  but  no  trace  or  hint  of  his  existence.  On  the  Episcopal 
scheme  the  world  is  studded  full  of  them  ;  the  very  life  and 
breath  of  all  Church-existence  depends  upon  them ;  and  yet,  some- 
how, they  are  so  very  noiseless  and  shy,  that  nobody  seems  to 
know  anything  about  them  ;  and  no  footstep  or  trace  is  left 
either  of  their  name  or  of  their  existence  !  No  ;  nothing  but  a 
few  arrant  perversions,  and  some  two  or  three  chains  of  random 
guesses,  is  pretended,  as  yet,  to  show  that  Diocesans  exist  any- 
where upon  the  face  of  the  earth !  The  Apostles,  so  called,  are 
dead.  The  angels  of  the  Churches  are  no  more.  The  Bishops 
sit  everywhere,  each  as  the  -Pastor  or  Presbyter  of  his  own  con- 
gregation ;  but  the  Diocesan,  where  is  he  ? 

O  yes,  it  is  said ;  but  hear  our  next  witness  and  he  will  tell 
you  all  about  it.  Hear  IGNATIUS  : 

Ignatius!  He  comes  too  late  by  a  whole  hundred  years. 
Ignatius  ?  I  hear  bad  stories  about  the  writings  attributed  to 
Ignatius.  I  hear  from  Prelatists  and  Puritans,  Papists  and  Pu- 
seyites,  that  the  greater  part  of  the  writings  attributed  to  Ignatius 
bear  indubitable  marks  of  forgery  ;  and  that  the  remainder  is  so 
full  of  interpolations,  that  no  one  is  willing  to  vouch  for  a  single 
sentence,  that  it  was  penned  by  Ignatius. 

But  will  you  not  hear  our  truly  important  witness  ?  Will  you 
not  hear  Ignatius  ?  Certainly  ;  we  wish  to  hear  him.  But  first 
tell  us  yourselves  how  much  this  witness  is  worth.  If  you  turn 
to  the  last  page  of  the  appendix  of  Chapin's  Primitive  Church, 
you  will  find  it  admitted  that  there  are  two  versions,  or  distinct 
copies,  of  what  purports  to  be  the  same  seven  epistles  of  Ignatius ; 
the  one  set  long,  the  other  set  short.  One  set  teaches  Arianism, 
the  other  its  opposite.  Chapin  thinks  that  we  may  well  guess 
the  one  which  teaches  Arianism,  to  be  a  forgery ;  and  that 
the  shorter,  therefore,  must  be  the  true  copy.  But  with  regard 
to  the  epistles  in  the  shorter  set,  he  admits  the  general  conclusion 
of  the  learned  world  ;  that  they  are  altered  and  interpolated,  with 
no  notice  given,  to  inform  us  what  paragraphs,  phrases  and  epi- 
thets, are  genuine,  or  what  are  spurious. 

Now,  how  are  we  to  pick  out  what  really  belongs  to  Ignatius  ? 


340  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

How  do  you  know  that  it  is  Ignatius,  that  you  would  bring 
upon  the  stand,  or  that  it  is  not  some  lying  monk,  or  some  scores 
of  lying  advocates  of  Popery,  who,  in  the  course  of  seven  centu- 
ries, have  here  mingled  and  confounded  their  forgeries  together  ? 
Mr.  Chapin  gives  us  a  very  sage  rule  for  getting  out  of  this  difficulty. 
He  tells  us  to  compare  the  interpolated  and  altered  copies  with 
the  forged  ones  ;  and  where  the  dubious  witnesses  accord  with 
the  lying  ones,  he  would  have  us  guess  that  the  first  probably 
speak  the  truth ;  and  this  guess  he  would  have  us  admit  as  a 
proof  for  Episcopacy  !  . 

Very  well ;  let  us  now  hear  the  witness,  with  the  full  under- 
standing that  we  are  to  guess  as  we  can,  where  he  speaks  the 
truth,  and  where  the  contrary.  And  if  he  proves  Episcopacy,  we 
will  not  be  so  unreasonable  as  to  refuse  to  admit,  that  Episcopacy, 
after  having  come  down  to  the  second  century  and.  been  found 
wanting,  has  now  some  tolerable  ground  of  guess-work,  to  rest 
upon  in  the  testimony  of  a  witness,  concerning  whom,  nobody 
can  tell  when  he  lies,  or  when  he  speaks  the  truth. 

"  Obedience  to  Bishops  as  the  successors  of  the  Apostles," 
says  Chapin  (p.  213),  "  is  one  of  the  leading  topics  of  Ignatius." 
"  In  all"  [his  seven  epistles]  "  a  prominent  topic  is  obedience  to 
the  Bishop." 

"  Wherefore,  it  becomes  you,"  says  Ignatius,  "  to  run  together 
according  to  the  will  of  your  Bishop." 

"  It  is  your  duty,  also,  not  to  despise  the  youth  of  your  Bishop, 
but  to  yield  all  reverence  to  him  according  to  the  power  of  God  the 
Father  ;  as  also,  I  perceive  your  holy  Presbyters  do.  *  *  * 
It  is,  therefore,  fitting  that  we  should  not  only  be  called  Chris- 
tians, but  be  so  ;  as  some  call  a  Bishop  by  that  name,  yet  do  all 
things  without  him."  *  *  *  "It  is,  therefore,  necessary  that 
ye  do  nothing  without  your  Bishop,  even  as  ye  are  wont."  * 

*  *     "He  that  is  within  the  altar  is  pure.     But  he  is  not  that 
doeth  anything  without  the  Bishop,  Presbyters  and  Deacons. 

"  For  as  many  as  are  of  Christ,  are  with  their  Bishop.     *     * 

*  I  cried  whilst  I  was  among  you,  I  spake  with   a  loud  voice. 
Give  ear  to  the  Bishop,  and  to  the  Presbyters,  and  to  the  Dea- 
cons.    *     *     *     See  that  ye  follow  your  Bishop  as  Jesus  Christ, 
the  Father,  and  the   Presbyters  as  the  Apostles,  and  reverence 
the  Deacons  as  the  command  of  God."     *     *     "  He  that  honors 
the  Bishop  shall  be  honored  of  God."    *     *    "  Hearken  unto  the 
Bishop,  that  God  may  hearken  unto  you. 

"  My  soul  be  security  for  those  who  submit  to  their  Bishop, 
Presbyters  and  Deacons."  *  *  *  "  Especially  if  at  unity 
•with  the  Bishop,  and  the  Presbyters  and  Deacons.  Give  ear  to 
the  Bishop,  and  to  the  Presbtflers,  and  to  the  Deacons."  *  *  * 


PRELACY    DISPROVED    BY    THE  FATHERS.  341 

"He  that  doeth  anything  without  the  Bishop  and  Presbyters  and 
Deacons  is  not  pure  in  his  conscience." 

Such  is  the  amount  of  the  testimony  of  Ignatius.  The  writings 
attributed  to  him,  speak  unequivocally  and  repeatedly  of  Bish- 
ops. Presbyters,  and  Deacons. 

Upon  this  I  remark, —  • 

1.  How  easy  it  would  have  been  for  those  who  confessedly 
interpolated  so  much  in  the  shortest  of  these  epistles,  to  have 
added  the  word  Presbyters  and  Presbytery  in  these  few  passages? 
The  best  critics  argue,  from  the  great  stress  laid  upon  the  digni- 
ty of  Bishops,  and  the  extravagant  exhortations  to  obey  them  as 
God  the  Father,  that  these  passages  were,  in  all  likelihood,  dis- 
honestly inserted  in  after  times,  to  magnify  the  office  of  Bishop. 
Others,  and  many  among  the  deeply  learned,  do  not  hesitate  to 
declare  the  whole  epistles  to  be  forgeries  ;  alleging  the  tone,  spirit, 
and  style,  to  be  indicative  of  a  later  age  ;  that  there  are  anachro- 
nisms, corruptions,  and  absurdities  enough  to  stamp  the  brand 
of  forgery  upon  the  whole ;    that  it  is  absurd  to   suppose   that 
Ignatius  while  a  prisoner,  and  in  custody  of  his  persecutors  on 
his  way  to  martyrdom  at  Rome,  should   be  allowed  leisure  and 
means  to  write  these  numerous  epistles.     "  And   truly,"   says 
Stillingfleet,  "  the  story  of  Ignatius  (as  much  as  it  is  defended 
with   his  epistles)  doth  not  seem  to  be  any  the  most  probable. 
For  wherefore  should  Ignatius  of  all  others  be  brought  to  Rome 
to  suffer,  when  the  proconsuls,  and  the  Presides  Provinciarum 
did  everywhere  in  that  time  of  persecution  execute  their  power 
in  punishing  Christians  at  their  own  tribunal,  without  sending 
them  to  Rome  to  be  martyred  there  ?     And  how  came  Ignatius 
to  make  so  many,  and  such  strange  excursions,  as  he  did,  by  the 
story,  if  the  soldiers  that  were   his  guard  were  so  cruel  to  him, 
as  he  complains  they  were  ?     Now  all  these  uncertain  and  fabu- 
lous narrations  as  to  persons  there,  arising  from  want  of  suffi- 
cient records  made  at  those  times,  make  it  more  evident  how  in- 
competent a  judge  antiquity  is,  as  to  the  certainty  of  things  done 
in  Apostolic  times." 

John  Milton  long  ago  made  this  common  sense  remark  con- 
cerning the  authority  of  these  writings  in  this  controversy.  "  To 
what  end  then  should  they  cite  him  as  authentic  for  Episcopacy, 
when  they  cannot  know  what  is  authentic  in  him,  but  by  the 
judgment  which  they  brought  with  them,  and  not  by  any  judg- 
ment which  they  might  safely  learn  from  him." — (Coleman,  p. 
198.) 

2.  When  we  add  to  this,  the  inconsistency  of  this  alleged 
testimony  of  Ignatius  with  the  testimony  of  Clemens  Romanus, 
and  Polycarp,  it  is  rendered  the  more  probable,  that  if  these 
epistles  are  genuine,  their  testimony  is  interpolated,  i.  e.,  on  the 


342  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

supposition  that  the  import  of  the  passages  is  what  it  is  claimed 
to  be.     I  say  on  this  supposition  ;  for 

3.  Admitting  them  to  be  genuine  it  does  not  follow  that  the 
Bishop  here  spoken  of,  holds  the  office  of  Apostle.     He  may 
have  been  of  the  same  order  as  a  Presbyter,  and  only  chosen  as 
a  special  superintendent,  as  was  afterwards  done.     The  testi- 
mony admitted  to  the  full  extent  of  all  that  is  claimed  for  it,  does 
not  stretch  the  proof  back  over  the  impassable  chasm,  which  we 
have  heretofore  seen  to  exist  between  the  Apostles  and  the  ex- 
istence of  Diocesan  Bishops. 

4.  Nothing  goes  to  show  that  the  term  Bishop,  as  denoting 
an  order  of  office,  has  as  yet  changed  its  meaning ;  but  positive 
evidence  that  about  this  time  the  word  generally  meant  what  it 
did  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles.     The  testimony,  admitting  it  to 
be  genuine,  is  capable  of  being  explained   otherwise  than  by 
supposing  that  the  name  Bishop  had  changed  its  meaning.     No- 
thing points  beyond  the  arrangement  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
with  its  Bishop  (Pastor),  Elders,  and  Deacons:     There  is   no 
ground  for  the  conjecture,  that  the  Bishop  here  spoken  of  must 
have   been   a  Diocesan,  the  ruler  of  several   Churches.      The 
Churches  written  to  are  single  congregations  ;    at  Ephesus,  at 
Magnesia,  at  Tralles,  at  Philadelphia.     No  reason  exists  for  sup- 
posing these  Diocesan  Churches.     It  is  conjectured  that  they  are 
Dioceses.     It  is  conjectured  that  these  Bishops  are  of  a  different 
order  from  the  Bishops  made  by  the  Apostles,  and  which,  up  to 
this  time,  have  been  found  as  Pastors  of  single  congregations, 
everywhere  all  over  the  Christian  world.     It.  is  conjectured  that 
these  epistles  are  not  forgeries ;  and  though  interpolated,  beyond 
the  power  of  man  to  determine  what  parts  are  genuine,  it  is  con- 
jectured that  these  passages  are  not  interpolations  ;  and  that  they 
are  not  themselves  interpolated  by  the  addition  of  one  single  word  ; 
and  so  Episcopacy  reposes  her  weight  upon  the  strength  of  this 
chain  of  conjectures.  It  is  the  best  evidence  she  has  ;  altogether  the 
strongest  and  best.     In  a  matter  where  proof  would  be  abundant 
and  overwhelming,  broad  and  legible  as  the  sun  at  noon-day, 
if  the  monstrous  claims  of  Episcopacy  had  any  foundation  in 
truth,  she  is  here  compelled  to  rest  upon  this  scanty  and   con- 
jectural ground  !     The  very  necessity  which  drives  her  to  hold 
here  is  fatal  to  her  cause. 

5.  What  finally  renders  all  these  Prelatical  conjectures  of  no 
value,  is  that  if  admitted  they  prove  too  much,  and  overthrow 
the  point  which  Episcopacy  wishes  to  prove  by  Ignatius.     The 
point  to  be  proved  is,  that  Diocesan  Bishops  are  the  successors 
in  the  office  of  the  Apostles.     If  Ignatius  proves  not  that  point, 
he  proves  nothing  at  all.     But  if  we  admit  his  testimony,  it  ex- 
pressly proves  that  Bishops  do  not  succeed  the  Apostles,  but  are 


PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS.  343 

the  vicegerents  of  God  the  Father,  while  Presbyters  are  the  suc- 
cessors of  the  Apostles.  Unfortunately  Ignatius  himself,  or 
whoever  forged  or  interpolated  his  epistles,  lived  too  early  for 
the  more  recent  Episcopal  theory  that  Bishops  are  successors 
of  the  Apostles.  Recall  Ignatius  and  ask  him.  Speak,  Ignatius ; 
are  your  Bishops  in  reality  Apostles  ;  successors  in  the  office  of 
those  who  originally  bore  the  name  ?  He  speaks ;  "  Yield  all 
reverence  to  your  Bishop  according  to  God  the  Father."  Well, 
that  is  rather  dubious ;  can  you  not  speak  a  little  plainer,  Igna- 
tius, and  tell  us  how  it  is  ?  "  See  that  ye  follow  your  Bishop 
as  Jesus  Christ  the  Father,  and  the  PRESBYTERS  as  the  APOS- 
TLES." 

O  now  we  understand  you,  Ignatius ;  you  afford  no  counte- 
nance to  the  more  recent  basis  of  the  Episcopal  claims.  But 
speak  again,  Ignatius ;  tell  us  over  and  over  again  :  do  you 
agree  with  modem  Prelatists,  in  making  your  Bishops  successors 
of  the  Apostles,  or  do  you  not  ?  He  speaks,  "  Let  all  reverence 
the  Deacons  as  Jesus  Christ ;  and%ie  Bishop  as  the  Father;  and 
the  Presbyters  as  the  Sanhedrim  of  God,  the  college  of  the  Apos- 
tles." And  again :  "  Without  your  Bishop  you  should  do  no- 
thing ;  also  be  ye  subject  to  your  Presbyters  as  to  the  Apostles 
of  Jesus  Christ." 

It  is  a  clear  case,  that  whoever  wrote  these  epistles,  he  was  ig- 
norant of  the  claims  of  Bishops  to  be  successors  of  the  Apostles ; 
since  he  pertinaciously  persists  in  putting  Presbyters  in  the  place 
of  Apostles,  and  in  making  the  Bishops  vicegerents  of  God. 
The  Ignatian  epistles,  however  spurious  or  interpolated,  were 
written  before  that  figment  was  laid  down  as  the  basis  of  the 
Episcopal  claims. 

We  have  now  brought  the  matter  down  to  the  middle  of  the 
second  century,  and  found  neither  Diocesan  Bishop  nor  official 
successor  of  the  Apostles.  But  let  us  pass  on. 

Irenceus,  who  died  about  A.  D.  202,  speaking  of  Marcion  and 
other  heretics,  says  ;  "  When  we  refer  them  to  the  Apostolic  tra- 
dition which  is  preserved  in  the  Churches  through  the  succession 
of  their  Presbyters,  these  men  oppose  the  tradition,  pretending 
that  being  more  wise  than  not  only  the  Presbyters,  but  the  Apos- 
tles themselves,  they  have  found  uncorrupted  truth."  Soon  af- 
ter, he  styles  these  Presbyters,  Bishops.  u  We  can  enumerate," 
he  continues,  "  those  who  were  constituted  by  the  Apostles, 
Bishops  and  their  successors  even  down  to  our  time."  Again  he 
calls  Poly  carp  "Bishop  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna,"  and  afterwards 
calls  him  that  "  Holy  and  Apostolical  Presbyter"  You  will  re- 
cognize still  the  Scriptural  identity  of  Bishop  and  Presbyter. 

Again  he  says,  "  the  Apostles  founding  and  instructing  the 
Church  (of  Rome)  delivered  to  Linus  the  Episcopate.  Anacle- 


344  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

tus  succeeded  him :  after  him  Clement  obtained  the  Episcopate 
from  the  Apostles :" — he  proceeds  to  enumerate  in  order,  "  Eva- 
ristus,  Alexander,  Sixtus,  Hygnus,  Pius,  Anicetus,  and  Eluthe- 
rus  in  the  twelfth  place." 

Here,  say  the  Prelatists,  you  find  the  succession  of  Bishops : 
and  accordingly  the  names  of  this  succession  are  paraded  in  all 
the  tables  of  Episcopal  genealogies.  But  softly :  This  same  Ire- 
naeus  writing  against  Victor,  Bishop  of  the  Roman  Church,  says, 
"  Those  Presbyters  before  43oter,  who  governed  the  Church  which 
thou  Victor  now  governest :  I  mean  Anicetus,  Pius,  Hygnus, 
Telesiphoms,  and  Sixtus;  did  they  not  observe  it?  And  those 
Presbyters  who  preceded  you,  did  they  not  observe  it  ?  And  when 
the  blessed  Polycarp,  in  the  days  of  Anicetus,  came  to  Rome,  did 
he  not  persuade  Anicetus  to  observe  it  ?  as  he  (Anicetus)  declar- 
ed that  the  custom  of  the  Presbyters,  who  were  his  predecessors, 
should  be  retained?" 

Irenaeus  uses  the  words  Presbyter  and  Bishop  as  synony- 
mous. The  very  Bishops  set  down  in  the  list  of  the  Episcopal 
succession,  he  styles  Presbyters. 

By  this  time,  one  appointed  by  the  Presbyters  of  large 
Churches  to  be  their  moderator,  began  to  rise  gradually  above 
his  brethren  ;  but  not  yet  so  far  as  to  be  recognized  as  of  a  differ- 
ent order.  Accordingly  we  find  Clemens  of  Alexandria,  in  the 
beginning  of  the  third  century,  speaking  of  Bishops,  Presbyters, 
and  Deacons.  "Numerous  other  precepts,"  says  he,  "directed 
to  select  characters,  some  to  Presbyters,  some  to  Bishops,  some 
to  Deacons,  and  others  to  widows,  &c."  Here  the  name  Bishop 
begins  to  be  used  distinctly  from  the  name  Presbyter  ;  but  it  does 
not  yet  begin  to  signify  a  different  order  ;  for  Clemens  repeatedly 
shows,  that  as  yet  there  are  properly  but  two  orders  in  the  minis- 
try. Having  observed  that,  in  most  things,  there  are  two  sorts 
of  ministry,  the  one  of  a  nobler  nature  than  the  other  which  is 
subservient ;  and  having  illustrated  this  distinction  by  several 
other  examples,  he  says  :  "  Just  so  in  the  Church,  the  Presby- 
ters are  entrusted  with  the  dignified  ministry ;  the  Deacons,  with 
the  subordinate."  He  speaks  of  a  nQoxudedma  — Or  first  seat  in 
the  Presbytery.*  From  all  which,  as  Coleman  has  well  observed, 
"  the  obvious  inference  is,  that  the  Bishop  of  this  author  is  only  the 
xQMecnus  of  early  writers — the  Presiding  Elder  of  the  Presbyte- 
ry." "  Henceforth,  the  title  of  ngueaTug  is  seldom  used  in  the 
Fathers,  but  instead  of  that,  the  word  Bishop  constantly  occurs/' 

Yet  even  after  this  time,  the  word  Presbyter  is  used  by  Cle- 
mens of  Alexandria,  interchangeably  with  Bishop.  Thus,  he 
relates  how  John,  struck  with  the  appearance  of  a  young  man, 
committed  him  to  the  Bishop  that  presided  over  all;  and  the 

*  Coleman,  p.  173. 


PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS.  345 

Presbyter  (the  Bishop)  taking  this  young  man,  nourished,  edu- 
cated, and  lost  him.  John,  on  his  return,  addressed  that  Presby- 
ter with  the  style  "  O  Bishop  /"  If  John  called  him  Bishop,  he 
must  needs  have  been  a  Bible  Bishop,  and  identical  with  a 
Presbyter. 

Here,  then,  we  find  the  rise  of  Prelacy,  in  the  beginning  of  the 
third  century.  A  Presbyter,  first  appointed  as  a  standing  mode- 
rator by  the  Presbyters  of  large  Churches,  grew  up  gradually 
into  power,  till  finally  he  usurped  not  only  the  power,  but  the 
name.  We  trace  the  identity  of  Presbyters  and  Bishops  up  to 
the  middle  of  the  second  century :  and  it  is  not  pretended  that 
there  is  anywhere  a  higher  officer,  of  any  other  name. 

But  now,  lest  it  should  be  thought  that  these  conclusions  de- 
pend too  much  upon  the  deductions  of  argument,  and  not  suffi- 
ciently upon  testimony,  let  us  call  a  witness  who  shall  substan- 
tiate these  facts  by  his  clear  and  undeniable  testimony.  Let 
JEROME  come  forward  and  tell  what  he  knows  of  this  matter. 

Jerome  died  A.  D.  426.  Erasmus  styles  him  "  by  far  the  most 
learned  and  most  eloquent  of  all  the  Christians,  and  the  prince 
of  Christian  Divines"  (Coleman,  p.  182).  In  his  Commentary 
on  Titus,  Jerome  says,  "  A  Presbyter,  therefore,  is  the  same  as  a 
Bishop.  And  before  there  were,  by  the  devil's  instigation,  parties 
in  religion,  and  it  was  said  among  the  people,  I  am  of  Paul,  I 
am  of  Apollos,  and  I  of  Cephas,  the  Churches  were  governed  by 
the  Common  Council  of  the  Presbyters.  But  afterwards  *  * 
it  was  determined  in  the  whole  world,  that  one  chosen  from 
among  the  Presbyters  should  be  put  over  the  rest." 

He  proves  the  identity  of  Presbyters  and  Bishops  by  the 
Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Philippians — •"  Paul  and  Timotheus  to  all 
the  saints  in  Christ  Jesus  which  are  at  Philippi  with  the  Bishops 
and  Deacons"  "  Philippi,"  says  Jerome,  "  is  a  single  city  of 
Macedonia  ;  and  certainly  in  one  city,  there  could  not  be  several 
Bishops  as  they  are  now  styled :  but  as  they  at  that  time  called 
the  very  same  persons  Bishops  whom  they  called  Presbyters,  the 
Aposlle  has  spoken  without  distinction,  of  Bishops  and  Presby- 
ters." He  proves  the  same  from  the  address  of  Paul  to  the  El- 
ders of  the  Church  of  Ephesus  :  "  Take  particular  notice,"  says 
he,  "  that  calling  the  Presbyters  of  the  single  city  of  Ephesus, 
he  afterwards  names  the  same  persons  Bishops"  "  Our  inten- 
tion," says  he,  "  is  to  show  that  among  the  ancients,  Presbyters 
and  Bishops  were  the  very  same.  But  by  little  and  little,  that 
the  plants  of  dissension  might  be  plucked  up,  the  whole  concern 
was  devolved  upon  an  individual.  As  the  Presbyters,  therefore, 
know  that  they  are  subjected  by  the  custom  of  the  Church  to 
him  who  is  set  over  them,  so  let  the  Bishops  know  that  they  are 


346  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

greater  than  Presbyters,  more  by  custom,  than  by  any  real  ap- 
pointment of  Christ." 

Prelatists  claim  from  Jerome's  accommodating  the  language 
of  Scripture,  "  when  one  said  I  am  of  Paul,  I  am  of  Apollos," 
&c.,  that  he  means  to  affirm  that  Diocesans  were  first  created 
upon  the  dissensions  in  the  Church  of  Corinth.  But  Stilling- 
fleet  has  well  replied  that  this  is  impossible,  since  the  proofs 
which  Jerome  adduces  of  the  identity  of  Bishops  and  Presbyters 
are  all  of  a  later  date  than  that  epistle  to  the  Corinthians.  It  is 
absurd  to  suppose  that  he  meant  to  fix  the  rise  of  Prelacy  at  the 
time  of  the  dissensions  in  Corinth,  and  yet  bring  all  his  proofs 
of  the  parity  of  Bishops  and  Presbyters  from  records  of  later 
times. 

Besides,  Jerome  says  that  the  distinction  grew  up  "  by  little 
and  little."  He  denies  that  a  Bishop  is  superior  to  a  Presbyter 
by  divine  appointment,  or  by  any  other  right  than  a  custom  of  the 
Church  which  grew  up  by  little  and  little.  Stillingfleet  has  well 
remarked,  that  if  Episcopacy  had  first  been  instituted  at  Corinth 
on  the  occasion  of  the  dissensions  mentioned  by  Paul,  then,  of 
all  places,  we  should  expect  to  find  a  Diocesan  at  Corinth.  But 
when  Clemens  Romanus  writes  to  the  Corinthians,  he  finds  fault 
with  their  turning  their  Presbyters  out  of  the  Episcopate.  He 
knows  absolutely  nothing  of  any  Diocesan  over  these  Presbyters. 

The  testimony  of  Jerome  stands  absolute  and  unequivocal, 
that  Bishops  and  Presbyters  were  originally  the  same ;  that  in 
ancient  times  the  Churches  were  governed  by  the  common  coun- 
cil of  the  Presbyters;  but  that  afterwards  Episcopacy  grew  up 
" by  little  and  little"  from  Presbyters  elected  to  preside  over  the 
rest ;  and  that  the  superiority  of  Bishops  over  Presbyters  is  not 
by  any  real  appointment  of  Christ,  but  by  the  custom  of  the 
Church.  And  he  appeals  to  Bishops  and  Presbyters  that  they 
both  know  it  to  be  so. 

But  it  is  alleged  that  Jerome  contradicts  himself  and  main- 
tains the  superiority  of  Bishops  over  Presbyters.  That  you  may 
have  this  objection  in  full  force.  I  will  here  copy  the  passages  as 
they  are  referred  to  in  Chapin's  Primitive  Church  (p.  200),  with 
his  capitals  and  italics,  to  set  forth  the  important  points  with  due 
prominence. 

u  The  Epistle  to  Evangelum,  if  it  be  genuine,  which  some  doubt, 
was  written  on  hearing  that  some  one  had  given  Deacons  preference  to 
Presbyters,  as  though  they  were  of  a  superior  order."  Upon  this  he 
says,  "  I  hear  that  one  was  so  impudent  as  to  rank  Deacons  before 
Presbyters,  that  is  Bishops.  Now  the  Apostle  plainly  declares  the  same 
to  be  Presbyters,  who  are  also  Bishops."  And  after  mentioning  some  of  the 
duties  of  Deacons  and  Presbyters,  he  proceeds  to  quote  Phil.  u  1  ;  Acts 
xx.  17  ;  Titus  ii.  5-7  ;  1  Tim.  iii.  8,  in  proof  of  the  position  he  had 
before  laid  down,  when  he  adds : 


PRELACY   DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS.  347 

{<  Who  are  significantly  called  in  the  Greek  Episcopountes,  from  whence 
the  name  of  Episcopi  (Bishops)  is  derived."  He  then  quotes  from  one 
CAIUS,  a  Presbyter,  who  says : — "  In  the  See  of  Alexandria,  from  St. 
Mark  the  Evangelist  to  Heracleus  and  Dionysius,  Bishops,  thePresbyters 
always  elected  one  from  among  themselves,  and  raising  him  to  a  higher 
rank,  they  called  him  Bishop ;  much  as  an  army  chooses  an  Emperor, 
or  as  Deacons  elect  one  from  among  themselves,  and  call  him  Archdea- 
con. Indeed,  what  can  a  Bishop  do,  that  a  Presbyter  may  not  do,  EX- 
CEPT ORDINATION  ?"  Then  after  saying  that  the  same  practice  existed 
in  all  places,  he  adds,  "  Wherever  the  Bishop  be,  whether  at  Rome  or 
Engubium,  or  Constantinople,  or  Rhegium,  or  Alexandria,  or  Tanais,  he 
is  of  the  same  degree,  and  of  the  same  priesthood,  FOR  ALL  ARE  SUCCESSORS 
OF  THE  APOSTLES."  And  after  some  remarks  concerning  the  Roman 
custom,  he  adds ;  "  Let  them  know  wherefore  Deacons  were  establish- 
ed ;  let  them  read  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  remember  their  condi- 
tion. Presbyter  is  a  title  of  age  ;  Bishop  of  office.  Wherefore  [in  the 
Epistles]  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  is  mention  made  of  the  ordination  of 
Bishops  and  Deacons,  but  not  of  Presbyters,  because  in  the  Bishop 
the  Presbyter  is  contained.  We  are  advanced  from  the  less  to  the 
greater  ;  if,  therefore,  the  Deacon  is  ordained  from  among  the  Presby- 
ters, then  is  the  Presbyter  least ;  but  if  the  Presbyter  is  ordained  from 
among  Deacons,  then  is  the  Presbyter  of  a  higher  order  of  the  priest- 
hood. And  we  know  from  Apostolical  Tradition,  taken  from  the  Old 
Testament,  that  what  Aaron  and  his  sons  and  the  Lemtes  have  been  in  the 
Temple,  the  same  the  Bishops,  and  the  Presbyters,  and  the  Deacons  may 
claim  as  their  own  in  the  Church?'' 

By  the  help  of  italics  and  capitals,  Mr.  Chapin,  and  other  advo- 
cates of  Prelacy,  here  make  out  something  plausible  to  the  EYE 
of  a  careless  reader,  while  the  impression,  so  made,  is  false  to  the 
sense.  If  the  cursory  reader  casts  his  eye  over  the  passage  so 
garnished,  what  will  he  find  ? — "  What  can  a  Bishop  do  that  a 
Presbyter  may  not,  EXCEPT  ORDINATION  ?" — "  Wherever  the 
Bishop  be — he  is  of  the  same  degree — FOR  ALL  ARE  SUCCESSORS 
OF  THE  APOSTLES." — "  Because  IN  THE  BISHOP  THE  PRESBYTER  is 
CONTAINED." — "  What  Aaron  and  his  sons  and  the  Lemtes  have 
been  in  the  Temple,  the  same  the  Bishops,  and  the  Presbyters,  and 
the  Deacons,  may  claim  as  their  own  in  the  Church" 

This  array  is  set  forth  constantly,  by  the  advocates  of  Prelacy, 
to  show  that  Bishops  are  divinely  superior  to  Presbyters ;  that 
Bishops  may  of  divine  right  ordain,  while  Presbyters  may  not ; 
and  that  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  correspond  to  Aaron,  his 
sons,  and  the  Levites. 

Let  us  sift  this  testimony.  Jerome  begins  with  saying,  "I 
hear  that  one  was  so  impudent  as  to  rank  Deacons  before  Pres- 
byters" 

How  does  he  prove  that  they  are  not  so  ?  By  asserting  the 
identity  of  Presbyters  with  Bishops  :  «  Now  the  Apostle  plainly 
declares  the  same  to  be  Presbi/ters,  who  are  also  Bishops,"  and  he 


348  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

refers  to  the  passages  commonly  cited,  to  show  the  absolute  iden- 
tity of  the  two.  That  is,  Deacons  cannot  be  superior  to  Presby- 
ters, because  Presbyters  are  not  only  equal  to  Bishops,  but  iden- 
tical with  them. 

This  is  the  proof.  Will  Jerome  stultify  himself  in  pressing 
the  proof  further,  by  proceeding  to  show  that  Presbyters  are  not 
equal  to  Bishops?  He  certainly  does  not.  He  quotes  one 
Caius,  to  substantiate,  not  to  deny  what  he  has  affirmed  ;  viz.,  that 
Presbyters  are,  by  divine  right,  identical  with  Bishops.  "What 
is  the  proof  from  Caius  ?  "Why  this :  that  in  Alexandria,  the 
Presbyters  elected  one  of  themselves  to  hold  a  higher  authority. 
That  could  not  make  him  of  a  higher  order.  By  divine  right, 
and  appointment,  he  was  still  a  Presbyter,  though. by  the  elec- 
tion of  his  brethren,  he  was  made  their  presiding'  officer,  or  mode- 
rator ; — "Just," — says  Caius — "  as  Deacons  elect  one  from 
among  themselves  and  make  him  an  Arch-deacon ;" — yet  he  is 
but  a  Deacon  in  order  ;  he  holds  no  divine  order  above  that  of 
simple  Deacon  :  but  is  in  this  respect  a  simple  Deacon  still. 

What  further  proof  from  Caius  ?  Why,  that  even  at  this  day, 
Presbyters  are  so  identical  with  Bishops,  that  there  is  nothing 
that  a  Bishop  may  do,  which  a  Presbyter  may  not,  except  ordi- 
nation. Here  is  no  divine  right  alleged,  but  for  the  sake  of  or- 
der, and  by  the  election  and  appointment  of  his  brethren,  as 
Jerome  has  already  affirmed — he  has  at  this  day,  that  pre-emi- 
nence assigned  to  him. 

What  further  proof?  Why  this:  that  what  this  Bishop,  so 
elected  by  his  brethren  at  Alexandria,  is,  that  all  Bishops  are, 
whether  at  Rome,  Engubium,  or  anywhere  else ; — one  is  as 
much  a  successor  of  the  Apostles  as  another  ;  Presbyters  are,  by 
divine  right,  everywhere  equal  with  Bishops. 

What  further  proof?  Why  this  ;  that  Paul,  writing  to  Timo- 
thy and  Titus,  speaks  of  ordaining  Bishops,  but  nothing  of 
Presbyters,  for  the  simple  reason,  that  in  the  Bishop  the  Presby- 
ter is  contained ; — and  the  Bishops  mentioned  by  Paul  to  Timo- 
thy and  Titus  are  on  all  hands  admitted  to  be  simple  Presbyters. 
Our  author  wishes  to  show  in  this  place,  that  the  higher  order  of 
Bishop  embraces  the  inferior  order  of  Presbyter,  while  Jerome's 
argument,  and  the  proof  which  he  cites  from  Paul's  Epistle  to 
Timothy  and  Titus,  show  that  the  Bishop  and  Presbyter  referred 
to,  are  absolutely  identical. 

But  what  concerning  Aaron  and  his  sons,  and  the  Levites,  as 
answering  to  Bishop,  Priest,  Deacon  ?  Does  Jerome,  after  build- 
ing his  argument  entirely  upon  the  identity  of  Bishops  and  Pres- 
byters, now,  at  the  very  close  of  it,  turn  round  and  deny  that  same 
identity  ?  By  no  means.  The  answer  of  Stillingfleet  is  con- 
clusive on  this  point ;  "  For  the  comparison  runs  not  between 


PRELACY  DISPROVED  BY  THE  FATHERS.  349 

Aaron  and  his  sons  under  the  law,  and  Bishops  and  Presbyters 
under  the  Gospel;  bat  between  Aaron  and  his  sons  as  one  part 
of  the  comparison  under  the  law,  and  the  Levites  under  the 
other"  (i.  e.,  not  between  High-Priest  and  Priests,  but  embra- 
cing both  together  as  Priests  and  making  Levites  inferior).  "  So 
under  the  Gospel,  Bishops  and  Presbyters  make  one  part  of  the 
comparison,  answering  to  Aaron  and  his  sons  in  that  wherein 
they  all  agree,  viz.  the  order  of  the  Priesthood ;  and  the  other 
part  under  the  Gospel  answering  to  the  Levites  under  the 
law." — (Irenicum,  p.  293.) 

In  an  evil  hour  for  Episcopacy,  she  fastened  upon  this  pas- 
sage to  make  Jerome  contradict  himself,  by  a  seeming  acknow- 
ledgment of  a  divine  right  of  Bishops  above  Presbyters.  His 
whole  argument  begins  and  ends  with  'the  affirmation,  and  the 
proof  that  Bishops  and  Presbyters  are,  by  divine  appointment, 
one  and  the  same.  Instead  of  a  contradiction,  it  is  as  strong  a 
corroboration  of  Jerome's  previous  testimony  as  can  well  be 
given ;  that  by  divine  appointment  Bishops  and  Presbyters  are 
the  same ;  that  in  primitive  times  they  were  identical ;  that 
Bishops  grew  up  into  a  superior  order  by  little  and  little,  from  a 
human  appointment  as  moderators  ;  and  that  this  both  Bishops 
and  Presbyters  of  his  day  know  to  be  true. 

We  have  now  done  with  the  Fathers.  Their  testimony 
sweeps  the  claims  of  Prelacy  away  as  with  the  besom  of  destruc- 
tion. Adducing  their  real  testimony,  which  Perceval  and  other 
Prelatists  are  so  careful  to  suppress,  and  clearing  away  the  per- 
versions of  those  parts  of  the  testimony  of  the  Fathers,  which  the 
advocates  of  Prelacy  adduce ;  the  evidence  stands  forth  clear, 
consistent,  and  uniform,  affording  no  manner  of  support  to  the 
Episcopal  claims  ;  but  making  it  certain,  that  the  entire  fabric  of 
Prelacy  grew  up  by  gradual  ursurpations,  and  is  as  baseless  of 
all  divine  authority,  or  of  primitive  institution,  as  the  domination 
of  the  Pope  or  the  false  prophet.* 

*  The  learned  Stillingfleet  comes  to  this  conclusion  with  regard  to  the  testimony  of 
the  Fathers.  "  For  as  to  the  matter  itself,"  says  he  (p.  301,  Irenicum} "  I  believe  upon 
the  strictest  inquiry  Medina's  judgment  will  prove  true  :  that  Hicrom,  Austin,  Jlm- 
brose,  Sedulius,  Piimasius,  Chrysostom,  Theodoret,  Theophylact,  were  all  of  Aerius's 
judgment,  as  to  the  identity  both  of  the  names,  and  ORDER  OF  BISHOPS  and  Pres- 
byters." 

Churchmen  are  fond  of  saying  that  Stillingfleet  afterwards  changed  his  mind. 
After  proving  by  matters  of  fad  the  novelty  and  idle  claims  of  Prelacy,  he  did,  in- 
deed, afterwards,  become  a  Bishop  and  a  bitter  enemy  to  all  dissenters  from  the 
Church  of  England.  Bishop  Burnet  says  of  him.  that,  "  To  avoid  the  imputation 
that  book  b'.  ought  on  him,  he  went  into  the  humors  of  a  his;h  sort  of  people,  beyond 
what  became  him,  perhaps  beyond  his  own  sense  of  things."  The  arguments  of  his 
Irenicum  against  the  divine  right  of  Episcopacy,  were,  however,  such  matters  of 
fact,  that  he  was  unable  ever  to  renounce  them,  or  set  them  aside.  "The  book," 
says  Bishop  White,  "  was,  it  seems,  easier  retracted  than  refuted,  for  though  offensive 
to  many  of  both  parties,  it  was  managed  with  so  much  learning  and  skill,  that  none 
of  either  side  ever  undertook  to  answer  it." 


XXVIII. 


INFERENTIAL  PRESUMPTIONS. 

High  Priests.     Priests  and  Levites.     Three  Orders.     The  Apostolic  Com- 
mission.    Claims  of  Diocesans  to  be  Vicegerents  of  Jesus  Christ. 

IT  is  alleged  that  the  three  orders,  Bishop,  Priest  and  Dea- 
con, come  in  the  place  of  the  three  orders,  High  Priest,  Priest 
and  Levite. 

This  is  mere  fancy  ;  the  Bible  gives  no  intimation  of  any  such 
thing.  Bishops  coming  in  the  place  of  the  Jewish  High  Priests! 
When  was  such  a  claim  made  by  the  Apostles  ?  Where  is 
there  the  faintest  intimation  of  such  a  thing  in  the  Word  of 
God? 

If  this  fancy  were  true,  and  if  the  argument  drawn  from  it  had 
any  weight,  then  it  would  go,  not  for  the  claims  of  the  Bishop, 
but  for  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope ;  since,  from  the  nature  of  the 
case,  there  could  be  but  one  High  Priest  in  the  world. 

But  the  fancied  resemblance  fails.  There  is  no  correspon- 
dence between  the  functions  of  the  Jewish  Priesthood,  and  those 
of  the  Christian  ministry.  Every  priest  must  have  somewhat  to 
offer ;  the  Christian  ministry  cannot  be  a  priesthood,  since  the 
offerings  and  sacrifices  of  the  Jewish  law  were  but  types  of  the 
priesthood  and  sacrifice  of  Christ.  The  substance  being  come, 
the  shadows  pass  away  ;  there  is  no  more  any  Priest,  or  altar, 
or  sacrifice,  since  Christ,  by  one  offering  of  himself,  hath  for 
ever  perfected  them  that  are  sanctified  by  him. 

The  High  Priest  entering  within  the  vail  to  make  atonement 
for  sin,  was  a  type  of  Christ  entering  into  the  holiest  place  of  the 
true  tabernacle,  obtaining  eternal  redemption  for  us.  For  any 
man,  therefore,  to  claim  to  come  in  the  place  of  the  Jewish  High 
Priest  is  a  deep  injury  to  the  sole  priesthood  of  Christ. 

The  claims  of  Episcopacy,  on  this  ground,  are  worse  than  sim- 
ple error ;  they  are  injurious  to  Christ,  and  subversive  of  the  entire 
truth  of  the  Gospel.  They  should  never  be  tolerated  for  a  mo- 
ment, but  met  with  the  most  pointed  and  indignant  rebuke. 

But  we  hear  the  advocates  of  Prelacy  harping  still  upon  the 
mystic  number  THREE.  It  is  said  that  there  were  three  orders 


INFERENTIAL    PRESUMPTIONS.  351 

under  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  three  orders  in  the  time  of  Christ ; 
and  therefore,  three  orders  in  the  Christian  ministry  to  the  end 
of  time. 

This,  too,  is  fanciful.  Tt  is  true  there  were  three  orders  of  of- 
fices under  the  Jewish  dispensation ;  but  that  dispensation  was 
of  temporary  use  and  arrangement.  The  Abrahamic  Church 
was  long  with  no  order  at  all.  Why  not  take  the  analogy  from 
this,  rather  than  from  a  priesthood  not  pertaining  to  the  covenant, 
and  which  was  designed  to  vanish  away  ? 

But  how  were  there  three  orders  in  Christ's  time  ?  It  is  al- 
leged that  Christ  was  one,  the  Apostles  another,  and  the  seventy 
a  third. 

But  the  seventy  were  no  Church  officers  at  all.  Their  work 
was  special  and  soon  completed. 

It  is  alleged  that  the  Deacons  succeeded  these.  But  the  work 
of  the  seventy  was  to  go  throughout  the  villages  and  preach  pre- 
paratory to  Christ's  personal  visits  ;  the  Deacons  were  permanent 
officers  in  each  Church,  to  see  to  its  secular  affairs.  The  Bible 
gives  no  intimation  that  they,  in  any  way,  take  the  place  of  the 
seventy  ;  and  there  is  no  resemblance  between  the  functions  of 
the  two  classes  of  men.  It  is  therefore  not  true,  that  Deacons 
came  in  the  place  of  the  seventy :  and  not  true  that  the  seventy 
were  any  order  of  Church  officers  at  all. 

If  our  Lord  is  one  order  in  the  ministry,  then  who  succeeds 
him  in  that  order  ?  Our'  Lord  is  one  ;  sole  head  over  the  whole 
Church.  He  has  no  peer  nor  equal.  If  the  Church  constitutes 
one,  he  can  have  but  one  successor.  This  argument,  also,  makes 
not  for  the  Bishops,  but  for  the  Pope.  If  our  Lord  was  ihe  first 
order,  then  the  Apostles  were  the  second ;  and  Bishops  claiming 
to  succeed  the  Apostles,  must  still  look  to  an  order  above  them  ; 
and  that  an  order  consisting  of  one. 

But  it  is  alleged,  that  when  Christ  departed,  the  Apostles  were 
raised  one  degree  from  second  to  first:  that  the  seventy  were 
raised  to  the  station  which  Apostles  previously  held,  and  Deacons 
created  in  place  of  the  seventy.  This  is  all  fancy,  and  contra- 
dictory to  fact.  The  Apostles  were  not  ordained  again  to  a 
higher  order :  the  seventy,  instead  of  being  advanced  to  higher 
dignity,  are  absolutely  mentioned  no  more;  and  in  no  sense  did 
Deacons  come  in  the  place  of  the  seventy.  This  is  all  an  awk- 
ward and  cumbrous  piece  of  machinery,  invented  for  the  special 
service  of  Prelacy.  And  yet,  when  Doctors  of  Divinity  put  on 
their  robes,  and  talk  gravely  about  High  Priest,  Priests  and  Le- 
vites;  Christ,  the  Twelve,  the  seventy;  Bishops,  Priests,  and 
Deacons :  Three  orders : — how  many  people  do  not  stop  to  ex- 
amine, but  receive  it,  as  if  it  were  not — what  it  is  in  reality — 


352  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

among  the  grossest  absurdities  that  have  ever  been  attempted  to 
be  palmed  off  under  the  name  of  truth  or  argument! 

But  it  is  alleged  that  the  Apostolical  Commission  transferred 
the  sovereignty  of  the  Church  from  Christ  to  the  Apostles ;  which 
sovereignty  devolves  (through  the  Apostles) — upon  the  modern 
Bishops,  and  that  thus  the  Bishops  come  into  the  place  of  Christ. 

The  first  passage  adduced  in  proof  of  this  monstrous  claim  is, 
that  in  Luke  xxii.  29-30.  "  And  I  appoint  unto  you  a  kingdom, 
as  my  Father  hath  appointed  me;  that  ye  may  eat  and  drink  at 
my  table  in  my  kingdom,  and  sit  on  thrones,  judging  the  Twelve 
tribes  of  Israel.  This,  says  Chapin  (Primitive  Church,  p.  165), 
"  Is  tantamount  to  saying,  I  MAKE  OVER,  OR  APPOINT  TO  YOU"  AS 
by  bequest^  the  KINGDOM  I  HAVE  RECEIVED  FROM  MY  FATHER  ; 
and  the  reason  given  is,  in  order  that  they  might  be  able  to  eat 
and  drink  at  that  table  which  he  had  spread ;  that  is,  might  have 
power  and  authority  to  consecrate  and  set  apart  the  elements  of 
bread  and  wine,  so  that  they  should  become  sacramentally  his 
body  and  blood,  as  he  himself  had  declared  them  to  be."  Cha- 
pin reiterates  this  doctrine  (p.  173),  insisting  that  Christ  "made 
over  or  committed,  as  by  devise  or  bequest,  THE  KINGDOM  which 
the  Father  had  appointed,  or  committed  to  him ;  in  order  that 
they  might — SIT  ON  THRONES  (the  emblems  of  power),  judging 
(in  a  judicial  sense}  the  twelve  tribes  (or  persons  composing  the 
commonwealth)  of  Israel,  which,  in  the  New  Testament,  signi- 
fies THE  CHURCH."  This  is  indeed  a  monstrous  claim,  now 
made  by  Diocesan  Bishops,  which,  formerly,  nobody  had  the  au- 
dacity to  make,  save  the  Pope,  KINGS  over  the  kingdom,  given  to 
Christ  by  the  Father  !  KINGS  [sovereigns]  of  the  Church !  (Lords 
over  God's  heritage!)  and  vicegerents  of  Jesus  Christ!  Christ 
is  no  longer  king:  He  has  abdicated— -made  an  assignment — 
vacated  the  throne,  and  "  made  over "  to  the  Bishops  "  THE 
KINGDOM  which  he  has  received  from  the  Father."  Can  the  hor- 
rid impieties  of  Popery  go  to  a  greater  length  of  extravagance 
and  madness,  than  the  claim  which  is  here  made  for  Diocesan 
Bishops?  It  is  assumed  that  "  kingdom  "  here  means  the  Church  ; 
and  that  sitting  at  his  table,  means  power  and  authority  to  conse- 
crate the  elements  in  the  Lord's  supper,  to  make  them  sacramen- 
tally  his  body  and  blood."* 

*  Hence  Chapin  argues  that  as  power  to  consecrate  must  be  derived  from  tl 
Bishop,  it  is  not  lawful  to  celebrate  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  supper  without  the 
Bishop's  consent  (p.  165).  He  quotes,  as  a  document  of  instruction  and  evidence, 
an  old  Liturgy  which  represents  the  consecration  as  "filling  the  bread  with  the  Holy 
Ghost^  In  his  Tract,  showing  the  sinfulness  of  Episcopalians  taking  the  sacra- 
ment from  other  hands,  or  of  uniting  with  other  denominations  in  their  public  wor- 
ship, he  claims  that  the  consecration  makes  the  bread  "  not  only  a  sign,  but  also  a 
MEANS  whereby  grace  is  given-" — imparting  the  most  precious  body  and  blood  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  worthy  partakers,  and  "  making  them  one  with  Christ," — 
"  filling  them  with  heavenly  benediction,  so  that  their  sinful  bodies  are  made  clean 


INFERENTIAL    PRESUMPTIONS.  353 

What  mountains  of  consequences  may  be  made  to  depend 
upon  a  little  false  interpretation  of  Scripture  !  If  you  turn  to 
the  passage  in  question,  you  will  perceive  that  there  is  no  trans- 
ferring of  Christ's  kingly  power,  and  no  allusion  to  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  Lord's  supper  contained  in  it  at  all.  Let  us  read 
the  whole  passage  :  Luke,  xxii.  24—30. 

u  And  there  was  also  a  strife  among  them  which  of  them  should  be 
accounted  the  greatest.  And  he  said  unto  them,  The  kings  of  the  Gen- 
tiles exercise  lordship  over  them  ;  and  they  that  exercise  authority  upon 
tht'tn  are  called  benefactors,  But  ye  shall  not  be  so  ;  but  he  that  is 
greatest  among  you,  let  him  be  as  the  younger ;  and  he  that  is  chief,  as 
he  that  doth  serve  ;  for  whether  is  greater,  he  that  sitteth  at  meat,  or 
he  that  serveth  1  is  not  he  that  sitteth  at  meat  1  but  I  am  among  you  as 
he  that  serveth  I  ye  are  they  which  have  continued  with  me  in  my 
temptations.  And  I  appoint  unto  you  a  kingdom,  as  my  father  hath 
appointed  unto  me  ;  that  ye  may  eat  and  drink  at  my  table  in  my  king- 
dom, and  sit  on  thrones  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel." 

Now,  what  transfer  of  kingly  power  is  here  ?  The  disciples, 
thinking  about  a  splendid  earthly  kingdom,  such  as  they  sup- 
posed the  Messiah  would  set  up,  disputed  who  should  be  the 
greatest.  The  Saviour  first  rebukes  their  ambition.  Their 
highest  greatness  is  to  be  as  servants.  "  Ye  are  they  which  have 
continued  with  me  in  my  temptations;"  as  if  he  had  said  ;  you 
want  to  be  great  in  my  kingdom; — well,  you  have  witnessed  my 
temptations  ;  you  have  seen  me  a  man  of  sorrows  arid  acquainted 
will)  grief;  you  have  seen  me  destitute,  afflicted,  persecuted, 
having  not  where  to  lay  my  head.  Such  a  kingdom  I  appoint 
you.  "  I  appoint  unto  you  a  kingdom  as  my  Father  hath  ap- 
pointed me,"  i.  e.,  glory  indeed  hereafter,  but  in  the  present  life 
tribulations.  Observe  he  does  not  say  THE  kingdom  V/HICH  rny 
Father  hath  appointed  me;  he  makes  no  transfer  of  his  kingly 
power ;  he  says  I  appoint  unto  you  "  a  kingdom,  as  my  Father 
hath  appointed  me  ;"  a  kingdom  of  sorrows  and  humiliation. 
You  are  disputing  who  shall  be  the  greatest,  in  what,  you  sup- 
pose, shall  be  my  earthly  kingdom.  Well,  you  have  been  with 
me  in  my  temptations,  my  trials,  my  sorrows;  and  just  such  a 
kingdom  I  appoint  unto  you;  tnat  ye  may  eat  and  drink  at  my 
table  in  my  kingdom,  and  sit  on  thrones  judging  the  twelve 
tribes  of  Israel.* 

by  his  body,"  and  "their  souls  washed  through  his  most  precious  blood;"  that 
none  but  Episcopal  ministers  have  this  power  to  consecrate  ;  hence  he  concludes 
that  the  bread  given  at  other  tables,  is  not  the  food  that  "  our  Father  hath  provided 
for  MS."  What  extravagance  of  Puseyism  goes  beyond  this?  And  this  is  Connec- 
ticut Episcopacy ! 

*  Rosenm tiller  says  on  the  passage.  "  The  sense  is,  As  my  father  hath  appointed 
me  a  kingdom  to  be  acquired  by  endurance  of  adcersities  •  so  I  appoint  unto  you  a 
glory  like  unto  royal  majesty,  to  be  acquired  in  a  similar  way"  That  is  to  say,  the 
kingdom  promised  to  the  Apostles  is  not  the  majesty  which  was  promised  to  Christ 
but,— from  the  connection, — the  reward  of  labor  undergone. 
23 


354  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Oh,  what  a  rebuke  to  their  ambition  !  And  out  of  this  rebuke, 
this  sorrowful  declaration  of  the  persecution  arid  tribulation  to  be 
endured  by  his  disciples  in  this  world.  Episcopacy  derives  a  trans- 
fer of  Christ's  kingly  power  and  sovereignty,  to  the  order  of 
Bishops  ;  and  exclusive  Letters  Patent  for  consecrating  the 
elements  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  to  make  them  sacramenlally  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  the  EFFICIENT  MEANS  OF  CONFER- 
RING DIVINE  GRACE ! 

Another  passage  relied  on  as  conferring  Prelatical  authority  is 
THAT  IN  MATT,  xxviii.  19,  20,  "  Go  ye  therefore  and  teach  all 
nations ;  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you.  And  lo  I  am  with  you 
always,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world." 

From  this  it  is  argued  :  1.  That  this  direction  is  addressed, 
and  the  promise  given  exclusively  to  the  Apostles  in  that  capaci- 
ty ;  and  that  2.  As  Christ  is  to  be  with  the  Apostles,  as  such,  to 
the  end  of  the  world,  so  the  Apostolic  office  is  always  to  subsist; 
and  that  the  line  of  personal  successors  in  this  office  is  always  to 
run  infallible  and  indefectible. 

Does  the  commission  contain  any  such  powers  or  promise  ? 

1.  It  is  assumed  that  this  commission  gives  the  sole  right  of 
ordaining-  and  ruling :    but  not  one  word  of  ordaining  or  of  ruling 
is  contained  in  the  passage.     It  is  a  commission  of  preaching, 
teaching,  and  baptizing,  which   any  ordinary  minister  may  do. 
How  then  can  it  be  a  commission  conferring  exclusive  Prelatical 
powers,  when  not  one  word  is  said  of  anything  which  Prelacy 
claims  as  peculiar  to  itself? 

2.  It  is  claimed  as  a  commission  and  a  promise  exclusively  to 
Prelates.     If  it  were  so,  then  Prelates  alone  must  go  and  preach 
the  Gospel  to  the  heathen.     Instead  of  staying  at  home  to  ordain 
and  confirm,  and  Lord  it  over  God's  heritage,  as  our  modern 
Diocesans  do,  every  soul  of  them  should  go  to  the  heathen ;  and 
nobody  else  should  go,  since,  as  it  is  claimed,  the  commission  is 
exclusive. 

3.  The  promise  is  not  of  a  personal  succession,  that  their  line 
shall  be  indefectible  in  ordaining  and  ruling,  but  to  them  who 
GO,  and  PREACH.     Those  who  do  not  go  and  preach — i.  e.,  who 
do  not  go  to  propagate  the  Gospel  abroad — cannot  exclusively 
claim  this  promise.     To  which  one  of  our  Diocesans,  then,  does 
the  promise  appertain  ?     How  preposterous  to  argue  from  this 
promise,  that  Christ  has  been  with  all  the  infidel,  obscene,  and 
murderous   Alexanders  and    Borgias,   who    have   ever  worn  a 
mitre,    so    that   the  possession   of  a   Prelate   who   derives   his 
authority  through  their  hands  is   a   mark  of  the  true   Church  ! 
But  has  not    Christ  been    with  his    missionaries   and    minis- 


INFERENTIAL  PRESUMPTIONS.  <JOO 

ters  (even  though  they  were  not  Prelates),  wherever  and 
whenever  they  have  been  found  preaching  in  obedience  to  his 
command  ?  Has  not  Christ  been  with  the  Baptist  missionaries 
in  Burmah  ?  with  the  Congregational  missionaries  in  the  Sand- 
wich Islands  ?  with  the  Moravians  in  Greenland  ? — with  Elliot, 
the  Mayhews,  and  with  Brainerd  among  the  Indians  ?  Are  the 
fruits  of  the  Divine  influences  of  the  Spirit  all  limited  to  Episco- 
pacy ?  It  is  true,  as  the  famous  Puseyite  Dr.  Hook  said  of  this 
country,  that  "  here  you  may  see  the  Church  "  (meaning  the 
Episcopal  Church)  "  like  an  Oasis  in  the  desert,  blessed  by  the 
dews  of  heaven,  and  shedding  her  heavenly  blessing  around 
her  in  a  land,  where,  if  it  were  not  for  her,  nothing  but  the  ex- 
tremes of  infidelity  or  fanaticism  would  prevail  ?"  And  Bishop 
Brownell  has  seen  fit  to  reiterate  this  sentiment,  charging  his 
clergy — with  reference  to  other  denominations,  that  "  surrounded 
by  all  this  desolation^  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this 
country,  appears  as  an  oasis  in  the  desert."  But  is  it  so  ?  Is 
there  nothing  but  the  extremes  of  infidelity  and  fanaticism  in 
this  country,  out  of  the  pale  of  the  Episcopal  Church  ?  Do  the 
dews  from  heaven  descend  exclusively  upon  the  Episcopal 
Church  ?  Are  their  preachers  and  missionaries  the  only  ones 
with  whom  Christ  goes  ?  Alas  !  what  madness  of  arrogance  is 
this  !  What  insulting  superciliousness,  towards  all  others  who 
bear  the  Christian  name  ! 

Another  passage  is  relied  on  for  these  exclusive  claims  of  Pre- 
lacy. It  is  that  contained  in  John  xx.  21,  25,  "  As  my  Father 
has  sent  me  even  so  send  I  you,"  &c.  This  "  EVEN  so,"  Cha- 
pin  argues  largely,  in  his  "  Primitive  Church,"  to  be  descriptive 
of  the  POWERS  granted  in  the  Apostolic  commission  ;  the  Bish- 
ops, in  this  respect,  taking  the  place  of  Christ,  in  the  authority 
which  he  received  from  the  Father ;  and  that  this  sentence  con- 
fers upon  the  Bishops,  Christ's  regal  and  priestly  power ;  his 
kingdom ;  and  his  authority  to  absolve  the  sins  of  repenting  sin- 
ners ! 

It  appears  very  strange  to  me,  how  any  man  can  possibly 
imagine  that  this  passage  is  a  transfer  of  Christ's  kingdom  and 
priestly  authority  !  To  me  it  seems  a  simple  sending  forth  of 
laborers  to  a  self-denying  work ;  to  call  men  to  repentance,  and 
to  invite  them  to  salvation.  So  Christ  was  sent — to  toil  and  to 
die  ;  so  he  sends  his  Apostles  ;  "even  so,"  not  to  die  as  he  died, 
an  atoning  sacrifice  for  sin;  but  to  spend  and  be  spent  for  the 
salvation  of  dying  sinners.  And  out  of  this  simple  sending 
forth  as  servants  and  laborers,  Prelacy  claims  a  transfer  to  lordly 
Bishops,  of  the  kingdom,  and  priestly  prerogatives  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ!  Was  there  ever  a  more  monstrous  or  inexcusable 
perversion  of  the  words  of  Holy  Writ  ?  Was  there  ever  a  more 


356  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

unscriptural  or  horrid  idea  than  this  fundamental  basis  of  Pre- 
lacy ;  the  demission  and  transfer  of  Christ's  priesthood  and 
kingdom,  to  earthly  representatives  and  vicegerents  ;  a  demission 
and  transfer  of  prerogatives  which  he  has  reserved  for  himself 
for  ever,  and  the  glory  of  which  he  will  not  give  to  another ! 

And  yet  how  unblushingly  these  claims  are  put  forth  ;  and  put 
forth  with  scarce  a  rebuke  ;  with  increasing  complacency  on  the 
part  of  Prelates,  and  with  increasing  belief  on  the  part  of  their 
people  ;  may  be  seen  by  some  extracts  from  a  production  of  Mr. 
McCoskry,  the  present  Protestant  Episcopal  Bishop  of  Michi- 
gan.* In  his  sermon,  "  Episcopal  Bishops,  successors  of  the 
Apostles,"  he  says,  "  He  (Christ)  is  the  head  and  permanent 
ruler  thereof;  and  although  now  removed  from  sight,  and  seated 
on  his  mediatorial  throne,  yet  he  governs  and  regulates  this 
Church,  or  kingdom  (as  it  is  frequently  called),  by  his  constituted 
agents,  to  whom  he  has  committed  THE  VERY  SAME  .AUTHORITY 
WHICH  HE  RECEIVED  FROM  THE  FATHER."  "  Everything  that 
could  be  possessed  by  a  mere  human  being,  was  given  by  the 
Saviour."  "  He  was,  as  the  Apostle  declares,  the  head  of  the 
body" — "consequently  this  headship  was  TRANSFERRED,  and  all 
the  power  necessary  to  preserve  and  regulate  the  body." 
"  It  must  follow  then,  that  as  Christ  is  the  permanent  Ruler  and 
Head  of  this  body  now  in  Heaven,  50  are  those  to  whom  he 
transferred  this  power  permanent  rulers  and  heads  on  earth."  * 
*  "  The  Apostles  were  raised  to  the  very  same  office  which 
Christ  himself  held,  I  mean  that  which  belongs  to  him  in  his  hu- 
man nature,  as  head  and  governor  of  the  Church.  They  were 
to  supply  his  place  in  this  respect,  and  in  short,  to  do 

everything  which  Christ  would  have  done  had  he  continued  on  the 
earth."  "  They  received  the  full  power  which  Christ  possessed, 
so  long  as  the  Saviour  exercised  the  OFFICE  OF  HIGH  PRIEST, 
and  before  he  TRANSFERRED  it  to  the  Apostles,  &c." 
"  It  cannot  be  supposed  for  one  moment,  that  the  Saviour  would 
transfer  so  great  an  office  as  he  himself  had  received  from  the 
Father,  without  giving  instructions,  *  *  whether  it  could 

be  transferred  to  others."  And  this  "VERY  SAME  OFFICE  WHICH 
CHRIST  HIMSELF  HELD,"  Bishop  McCoskry  claims,  has  been 
TRANSFERRED  and  TRANSMITTED  down  to  the  Bishops  of  the 
present  day!  And  if  this  has  not  been  done,  he  declares,  that 
"  all  who  profess  to  be  commissioned  as  ambassadors  of  Christ, 
are  gross  impostors !" 

Surely,  the  Bishop  of  Michigan  must  sufficiently  magnify  his 

office.     He  claims  to  have  received  the  kingdom  of  the  Church  in 

Michigan!  holding  the  very  same  office  that  Christ  would  hold, 

were  he  on  earth;  with  authority  to  do  all  that  Christ  in  his  hu- 

*  In  Boardman,  p.  274. 


INFERENTIAL  PRESUMPTIONS.  357 

man  nature  might  do,  as  head  of  the  Church  in  that  peninsula, 
were  he  there  in  person  !  Surely,  if  we  may  borrow  an  epithet 
of  the  old  Puritans,  we  have  an  abundance  of  ;' POPF.LINGS  "  in 
our  American  Dioceses,  each  speaking  "  high  swelling  words," 
but  scarcely  in  all  one  decent  POPE.  How  can  it  be  that  Christ 
can  have  so  many  supreme  VICEGERENTS,  holding  each  supreme 
authority  over  the  one  Catholic  Church?  How  can  it  be  that 
there  are  so  many  Heads  over  one  single  body  ? 

I  see  that  many  of  the  details  of  Popery  are  wanting  in  this 
system;  but  the' very  heart,  and  frame  work,  and  life-blood  of 
Popery  are  all  here.*  Let  these  principles  prevail ;  let  them  have 

*  The  following  extract  will  show  the  progress  which  Protestant  Episcopacy 
is  making  towards  Popery  in  the  Diocese  of  New  York.  It  is  from  a  funeral  ser- 
mon, on  the  death  of  Rev.  Palmer  Dyer,  late  of  Whitehall,  preached  in  Trinity 
Church,  Granville,  N.  Y.,  by  Rev.  John  Mien  Spooner,  A.  M.,  Rector  of  the  Church 
of  Messiah,  Glenn's  Falls,  and  of  Zion's  Church,  Sandy  Hill,  N.  Y.  The  extract  is 
copied  from  the  '•  Protestant  Churchman." 

"  He  was  Baptized.  The  record  and  proof  of  that  his  CONVERSION  is  in  the 
Church  book  at  Granville,  N.  Y.  At  the  sacred. fount  there  his  sins  were  washed 
away,  and  he  was  regenerated." 

"He  was  Confirmed.  There  is  left  us  no  doubt  as  to  his  '  receiving  the  Holy 
Ghost.'  That  gift  was  imparted  to  him  in  the  Church,  by  'the  laying  on  of  the 
hands  '  of  Bishop  Brownell ;  and  the  record  of  it  exists.  Our  ground  of  humble 
and  scriptural  joy  is  thus  enlarged.  Union  with  the  mind  of  God  was  thus  rendered 
more  sure  by  the  possession  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  enlighten  and  guide.  The  heart 
before  cleansed  in  Baptism,  now  made  the  Tenement  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  the  lesser 
Sacram  nt  of  Confirmation,  had  double  certainty  of  improvement." 

"  Hence,  when  after  mature  reading  he  was  led  to  the  belief  that  among  Chris- 
tians no  Baptism  had  ever  been  considered  unquestionably  safe  except  it  were  given 
by  a  Bishop  or  by  one  ordained  by  a  Bishop,,  he  at  once  ceased  to  rely  on  any  other, 
and  not  only  taught  so,  but  set  a  consistent  example  by  first  getting  himself  rightly 
baptized  in  the  Church.  Hence,  too,  he  was  a  second  time  confirmed,  because  he 
felt  that  confirmation  came  rightly  only  after  Baptism,  and  not  till  his  Baptism  in 
the  Church  did  he  consider  himself  as  baptized  at  all.  And  hence,  in  the  awaken- 
ing to  sound  truth  and  early  practice  which  the  spirit  of  God  has  mercifully  grant- 
ed to  part  of  Christendom  in  the  last  twelve  years,  he  thoroughly  sympathized  ; 
thankful  if  instead  of  one  accurate  and  energetic  minded  Ftoude  to  one  kingdom,  God 
had  kindly  %ivcn  many  to  each  ;  if.  instead  of  one  blameless  Pitsey  to  be  ignorantly  and 
unrighteously  condemned,  God  had  kindly  given  more  than  impugners  could  frame  de- 
crees to  silence." 

u  As  a  final  ground  of  consolation  and  the  crowning  and  necessary  mark  of  saint- 
ship,  we  notice  in  the  deceased,  that  he  continued  and  worthily,  in  the  communion  of 
the  (*/turch.  He  knew  that  out  of  the  fold  there  could  be  no  expected  safely :  that  out  of  the 
ark  there  could  be  nothing  but  the  common  distraction." 

"  Nay.  if  good  hope  exists  for  any  one.  it  must  be  drawn  from  such  deeds  and  ex- 
hibited conduct  as  could  not  be  well  brought  together  in  the  last  hours  of  a  few 
painful  days,  or  in  the  distracted  exercises  of  a  last  few  weeks.  Yea,  whosoever 
will  have  himself  and  leave  for  his  friends  the  Bible  ground  of  hope,  will  have  it  and 
leave  it  to  the  portraiture  following." 

'•  Bible  ground  of  hope  requires  of  a  person  that  he  be  Confirmed.  Without  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  that  which  is  required  to  precede  all  others,  is  imparted  by 
the  'laying  on  of  hands.'  And  in  all  cases,  that  in  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of 
the  chief  Minister,  the  Bishop,  as  an  act  distinct  from  Baptism  and  succeeding  to  it" 

'•  We  would  have  placed  before  this  the  existence  of  habitual  private  Confession 
and  Absolution.  Our  judgment  dictated  to  do  that  in  drawing  out  the  case  of  our 
departe  i  brother:  but  our  section  of  Christendom  has  lost  that  portion  of  the  Chris- 
tian's heritage.  Yet,  as  we  doubt  not  that  the  intervention  of  the  Priesthood  is  indis- 
pensable to  a  scriptural  tranquillity  of  the  conscience  so  do  we  believe  that  no  positive 


358  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

room,  and  air,  and  time,  to  expand  to  their  natural  growth,  and 
there  is  nothing  in  Popery  more  destructive  to  truth,  to  freedom, 
and  to  true  religion,  more  arrogant,  more  impious  toward  God, 
or  more  injurious  to  man. 

and  undoubting  ground  of  hope  can  ordinarily  exist,  either  in  an  individual  for  him- 
self or  in  others  for  him,  exeept  that  up  to  the  last  there  have  been,  as  in  the  case 
of  Hooker  (page  7),  habitual  confession  and  free  and  full  absolution  and  benedic- 
tion." 

"  It  is  the  absolution  and  benediction  of  the  Church,  for  which  God  looks  in  the  individual 
to  determine  that  he  is  in  favor.  It  is  to  the  Ministry  that  God  says  :  ;  Whatsoever  ye 
shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on 
earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven.'  St.  Matt,  xviii.  18.  Separated,  then,  from  the 
Church  we  see  no  ordinary  Bible  hope  of  heaven.  Otherwhere  than  in  the  Church, 
and  with  that  Ministry  which  God  appointed,  the  individual  is  not  '  loosed  from 
sin.' " 

"Habitual  religiousness  demands  frequency  in  the  stated  forms  and  acts,  of  piety, 
Among  those  forms,  the  restored  elevation  of  the  cross,  and  habitual  and  devout  cross- 
ing of  the  person,  should  be  distinguished.  In  our  poverty,  we  cannot,  it  is  true,  wit- 
ness the  consecrated  Church  at  the  end  of  every  second  league;  but  if  we  would, 
we  might  at  such  intervals  behold  the  Cross,  towards  which  the  traveller  might  turn,  and 
near  which  the  wayfarer  might  kneel.  And  devout  crossings  of  the  person,  while  in  every 
emergency  and  in  every  act  vie  might  not  by  word  place  ourselves  in  Christ,  by  this  sacred 
symbol  we  should.  Crossing  ourselves  in  the  beginning  of  a  duty  and  at  its  end,  as  when 
toe  rise  from  our  prayer ;  crossing  ourselves  at  the  appearance  of  danger,  or  in  each  hourly 
act,  we  thereby  invoke  the  power  of  Christ  and  place  ourselves  with  him :  and  so,  from  every 
section  could  one  go  to  his  death  from  almost  within  the  shadow  of  the  cross,  and 
in  any  emergency  close  his  eyes  in  the  embrace  of  the  Lord.  To  such  an  one  no 
death  could  be  a  surprise." 

"  Again,  among  those  acts  of  piety  that  should  be  frequent,  and  that,  next  to  the 
holy  Communion,  are  of  chiefest  efficacy  in  making  the  soul  ripe  for  even  an  un- 
warned death,  are,  habitual  private  confession,  and  the  Pastor's  absolution  and  the 
Pastor's  blessing.  Inflicted  Penance  is  the  loving  correction  that  maketh  great; 
the  Pastors  absolution  and  the  Pastor's  frequent  blessing  are  the  purest  and  richest 
gifts  through  Christ  on  this  side  of  heaven  to  fit  to  live,  to  fit  to  die,  and  to  insure 
the  best  destiny  of  eternity.  Frequency  in  the  stated  forms  and  acts  of  piety  is 
necessary  to  habitual  religiousness." 


XXIX. 


EPISCOPAL  EXCLUSIVENESS— ITS  BASIS  SUPER- 
STITION. 

THE  Bishop's  charge  in  Primitive  times  was  a  single  Church, 
not  a  Diocese  of  Churches.  Like  our  Congregational,  Presby- 
terian, and  Baptist  Churches,  every  congregation  had  its  Bishop, 
and  every  Bishop  his  congregation.  For  a  long  time  these 
Bishoprics  were  about  as  numerous  in  Christian  countries,  as 
Congregational  Churches  in  New  England.  The  parish  and 
the  Bishopric  were  coextensive  and  identical.  Instead  of  one 
Bishop  in  a  territory,  like  that  of  Connecticut,  there  were  scores, 
if  not  hundreds.  There  were  no  Diocesans  over  these  congrega- 
tions and  their  Bishops ;  each  Bishop  was  what  the  Apostles 
made  him  and  left  him,  the  Pastor  of  a  single  Church.  If  any 
one  will  see  the  proof  of  this,  let  him  read  Lord  King,  on  the 
Primitive  Church ;  a  work  which  Slater  has  vainly  attempted  to 
set  aside.  Let  him  read  Mosheim,  or  the  lectures  of  Dr.  Camp- 
bell, or  the  recent  works  of  our  own  Punchard  and  Colernan. 
The  length  to  which  these  lectures  have  already  been  protracted, 
admonishes  me  that  I  ought  not  to  enter  upon  the  details  of  this 
part  of  the  subject:  nor  is  it, indeed,  necessary.  Let  me  simply 
quote  the  conclusions  of  Archbishop  Whately  on  this  subject ; 
conclusions  of  whose  correctness  the  amplest  proof  is  at  hand. 

"  Each  Bishop"  says  Whately,  "  originally  presided  over  one 
entire  Church.  It  seems  plainly  to  have  been  the  general,  if  not 
the  universal  practice  of  the  Apostles,  to  appoint  over  EACH  SEPA- 
RATE CHURCH,  a  single  individual."  *  "A  Church  and  a 
Diocese  seem  to  have  been  for  a  considerable  time  co-extensive 
and  identical"  "  And  each  Church  or  Diocese  perfectly  inde- 
pendent as  regards  any  power  of  control."  "  The  plan  pursued 
by  the  Apostles  seems  to  have  been,  as  above  remarked,  to  es- 
tablish a  GREAT  NUMBER  of  SMALL  (in  comparison  with  modern 
Churches),  DISTINCT,  AND  INDEPENDENT  COMMUNITIES,  each  gov- 
erned BY  ITS  OWN  SINGLE  BISHOP,  consulting  no  doubt  with  his 
Presbyters,  and  accustomed  to  act  in  concurrence  with  them,  and 
occasionally  conferring  with  the  brethren  in  other  Churches." 


I 

360  THE   PURITANS   AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Whatehj  (like  Stillingfleet)  renounces  all  pretensions  1o  a  di- 
vine authority  for  Episcopacy.  He  denies  that  modern  Episco- 
pacy conforms  to  the  Primitive  model;  and  justifies  it  only  on 
the  ground  that  the  Church  has  power  to  alter  and  arrange  its 
own  polity,  without  being  limited  and  restricted  to  one  particular 
form.  "  And  they  "  [the  English  Reformers],  he  says,  "  rest  the 
claims  of  ministers,  not  on  some  supposed  sacramental  virtue 
transmitted  from  hand  to  hand,  in  unbroken  succession  from  the 
Apostles,  in  a  chain  of  which,  if  any  one  link  be  even  doubtful, 
a  distressing  uncertainty  is  thrown  over  all  Christian  ordinances, 
sacraments,  and  Church  privileges ;  but  on  the  fact  of  those  being 
the  regularly  appointed  officers  of  a  regular  Christian  communi- 
ty ;"  and  that  regular  Christian  community,  he  regards  as  "  a 
congregation  of  faithful  men," — "  having  inherent  rights  belong- 
ing to  a  community  ;"  to  declare  what  is  the  regular  way  of  ap- 
pointing their  officers  (pp.  123-125).  "  The  Church  of  England," 
he  maintains,  "it  is  notorious,"  "does  not  possess  exact  confor- 
mity ';  to  the  most  ancient  models.  And  he  adds — "  To  vindi- 
cate them  on  the  ground  of  the  exact  conformity,  which  it  is  noto- 
rious they  do  not  possess,  to  the  most  ancient  models,  and  even 
to  go  beyond  this,  and  condemn  all  other  Christians,  whose  insti- 
tutions and  ordainers  are  not  utterly  like  our  own — on  the  ground 
of  their  departure  from  the  Apostolical  precedents,  does  seem — 
to  use  no  harsher  expression — not  a  little  inconsistent  and  un- 
reasonable." "  And  yet,  one  may  not  unfrequently  hear  num- 
bers of  Episcopalians  pronouncing  severe  condemnation  on  those 
of  other  communities,  and  even  excluding  them  from  the  Chris- 
tian body:  not  on  the  ground  of  their  not  being  under  the  best 
form  of  government,  but  of  their  wanting  the  very  essentials 
even  of  a  Christian  Church ;  *  *  and  this  while  Episcopa- 
lians have  universally  so  far  varied  from  the  Apostolical  institu- 
tions, as  to  have  in  one  Church  several  Bishops,  each  of  whom, 
consequently,  differs  in  the  office  he  holds,  in  a  most  important 
point,  from  one  of  the  Primitive  Bishops,  as  much  as  one  of  the 
governors  of  our  colonies  differs  from  a  sovereign  prince." 

Had  not  this  work  been  already  so  long  protracted,  it  would 
afford  an  interesting  and  important  topic  of  inquiry,  to  trace 
in  history  the  simultaneous  growths  of  prelatical  assumption 
and  superstition,  as  side  by  side,  faithful  and  inseparable  co- 
adjutors, they  strode  on  to  an  undivided  dominion  over  the  un- 
derstanding, the  conscience,  and  the  liberties  of  mankind.  No 
sooner  was  the  figment  of  the  Christian  ministry  a  priesthood 
invented,  than  the  path  to  despotism  over  the  conscience,  and  to 
the  subversion  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  lay 
open  without  obstruction.  Ambitious  Prelates  were  sure  to  ex- 
alt their  ghostly  power,  and  to  grasp  an  entire  monopoly  of  con- 


EPISCOPAL    EXCLUSIVEXESS.  361 

ferring  that  power  in  ordination.  Forms,  canons,  sacerdotal 
rites,  absolutions,  penances,  false  doctrine  after  false  doctrine, 
and  one  superstitious  ceremonial  after  another,  followed  in  the 
train,  till  the  Gospel  and  all  religious  liberty  well  nigh  expired 
together.  WHAT  is  NOW  CALLED  PUSEYISM,  is  THE  NATURAL, 

AND    SURE    TO    BE      THE      ULTIMATE     SYSTEM      OF      PRELACY.       It  IS 

but  a  mingling  of  the  same  old  elements  in  the  same  old  way. 
Superstition  goes  hand  in  hand  with  every  advance  of  the  exclu- 
sive and  monstrous  claims  of  Prelacy.  He  who  forms  his  anti- 
cipations of  the  future  from  the  history  of  the  past,  will  readily 
perceive,  that  these  two  conspirators  against  truth  and  freedom 
are  only  travelling  the  road  which  they  travelled  before,  when 
corruption  in  doctrine  and  usurpation  of  power  went  hand  in 
hand  to  take  their  seat  upon  the  seven  hills  of  Rome. 
With  these  remarks  we  proceed  to  notice — 

THE  EXCLUSIVENESS  OF  THE  EPISCOPAL   CLAIMS. 

The  Rev.  Mr.  Wetmore,  one  of  the  earliest  champions  of 
Episcopacy  in  Connecticut,  did  not  hesitate  to  say  of  the  Congre- 
gational Churches  in  this  State  that  "  they  must  necessarily  be 
esteemed  abettors  and  approvers  of  schism,  disorders^  and  usurpa- 
tion; contempt  of  the  chief  authority  Christ  has  left  in  his 
Church;"  and  that  "whatever  they  may  call  themselves,  and 
whatever  show  they  may  make  of  piety  and  devotion  in  their 
own  ways,"  they  "  ought  to  be  esteemed  in  respect  to  the  mys- 
tical body  of  Christ,  only  as  excrescences  or  tumors  in  the  body 
natural,  or  perhapis  as  fungosities  in  an  ulcerated  tumor,  the  eat- 
ing away  of  which,  by  whatever  means,  tends  not  to  the  hurt  but 
the  soundness  of  the  body." 

If  such  language  had  been  uttered  only  by  a  few,  or  only  for 
some  hundreds  of  times ;  if  it  were  not  truly  descriptive  of  the 
principles,  and  the  line  of  conduct  pursued  by  all  High  Church 
Episcopalians,  with  regard  to  other  denominations  of  Christians, 
we  might  pass  it  by  as  the  raving  of  bigots ;  some  of  whom  are 
to  be  found  in  all  bodies  of  Christians,  and  whose  extravagances 
are  not  to  be  regarded  as  an  index  to  the  principles  and  spirit  of 
the  body.  But  I  am  sorry  to  be  obliged  to  say,  that  this  is  only 
a  sample  of  the  spirit  and  bearing  assumed  by  Episcopal  Eccle- 
siastics in  general  (with  some  few  rare  and  honorable  exceptions), 
towards  all  other  Christians,  save  only  the  followers  of  the  Pope, 
"  Incongruous  sects"  of  "  Dissenters"  is  the  style  adopted  by 
Bishop  Brownell  with  regard  to  all  other  Christian  denomina- 
tions. The  Episcopal  Church  he  styles  "The  true  Catholic 
Church."  The  Episcopal  Bishops,  in  general,  no  longer  style 
their  communion  "  The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,"  but  "  The 
Church  ;"  intending  by  that  term  to  deny  the  right  of  all  other 


362  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

bodies  of  Christians  to  be  considered  as  Churches.  The  Right 
Rev.  Thomas  C.  Brownell  writes  himself  Bishop,  not  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  IN  Connecticut,  but  "  BISHOP  OF  CONNECTI- 
CUT," intending  thereby  to  claim,  and  actually  claiming,  exclusive 
sovereignty  by  divine  right  over  all  Christians  in  the  whole  field. 
So  another  styles  himself  not — bishop  of  a  diocese  of  Episcopa- 
lians IN  New  York,  but  BISHOP  OF  NEW  YORK  ;  a  sovereign  by 
divine  right  of  the  whole  territory.  Another  claims  to  be  BISHOP 
OF  MARYLAND  ;  and  another  has  been  addressed  in  a  Dedication, 
by  the  celebrated  Pusey  as  "  GEORGE,  LORD  BISHOP  OF  NEW 
JERSEY  ;"  and  "  Lord  George"  claims  to  be  the  rightful  and  ex- 
clusive Apostle  of  that  domain  ;  as  another  claims  to  hold  the 
"  VERY  SAME  OFFICE,"  in  Michigan,  "  which  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ"  would  hold  over  Christians  in  that  field,  were  he  person- 
ally to  come  down  and  undertake  to  be  their  ruler.  The 
"  Church  Almanac,"  published  by  authority,  talks  not  of  The 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  IN  America^  but  of  "  THE  CHURCH 
OF  THE  UNITED  STATES,"  intending  thereby  to  deny  that  there 
is,  or  t?an  be,  any  other  Church  or  Churches  in  the  whole  do- 
main. Not  long  since,  an  Episcopal  minister  (Rev.  Mr.  Watson) 
spoke  in  a  printed  sermon,  of  the  people  in  the  sixty  towns  in 
Connecticut  where  Episcopacy  is  not  planted,  as  "  destitute  ones" 
"  destitute  of  the  sacraments,  destitute  of  a  Scriptural  ministry, 
destitute  of  the  Church  ;"  and  declared  that  "  every  inch  of  the 
ground"  belongs  to  Episcopacy.  Bishop  Brownell  looks  abroad 
over  the  tens  of  thousands  of  Christians  and  Churches  of  all 
Protestant  denominations  in  this  land;  and  complacently  styles 
them  a  "  Desolation,"  in  the  midst  of  which,  "  The  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church  appears  as  an  oasis  in  a  desert."  The  Bishop 
and  his  Presbyters  concur  in  admitting  the  authenticity  of  the 
Papal  Church  and  Priesthood,  while  they  deny  the  same  to  all 
Protestants,  save  of  their  own  Church.  A  "  Presbyter  of  Con- 
necticut," in  an  extensively  circulated  tract,  declares  he  "  cannot 
regard  the  confused  mass  of  Protestantism  as  anything  else  but  a 
human  contrivance,  the  weakness  and  folly  of  man  ;  the  result 
of  departing  from  the  divine  and  primitive  institution  of  Christ." 
"  With  as  much  propriety,"  he  declares,  "  might  we  suppose 
there  is  more  than  one  Holy  Spirit,  as  to  suppose  that  there  is 
more  than  one  Church"  "  The  Romish  Church,"  he  says,  "  must 
be  regarded  as  a  portion  of  the  Catholic  Church,  since  she  pos- 
sesses the  Apostolic  ministry ;  her  sacraments,  though  vitiated, 
are  not  invalid."  Bat  "as  to  Protestant  Dissenters,  how  can  they 
claim  to  be  a  portion  of  the  true  body  of  Christ,  when  they  lack  the 
very  foundations  of  a  Church  ?"  "  At  the  same  time,"  he  says, 
"  we  are  free  to  acknowledge  that  they  exhibit  fruits  of  piety  in 
their  lives.  We  could  take  example  from  them,"  *  *  *  we 


EPISCOPAL    EXCLUSIVENESS.  363 

doubt  not  they  may  be  saved  ;  *  *  so  we  believe  the  heathen 
may  be  saved."  In  the  same  manner  Palmer,  whose  work  is 
in  the  highest  vogue  among  Episcopalians,  says  of  other  denomi- 
nations, "  They  and  their  generations  are  as  the  heathen,  *  * 
we  are  not  warranted  in  affirming  absolutely  that  they  may  be 
saved."  Bishop  Hobart,  in  his  "  Companion  to  the  Altar,"  says, 
"  Let  it  be  thy  supreme  care,  O  my  soul,  to  receive  the  blessed 
sacrament  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour,  only  from  the 
hands  of  those  who  derive  their  authority  by  regular  transmis- 
sion from  Christ."  "  Where  the  Gospel  is  proclaimed,  com- 
munion with  the  Church  by  participation  of  its  ordinances  at 
the  hands  of  an  authorized  priesthood  is  the  indispensable  condi- 
tion of  salvation"  "  Great  is  the  guilt,  and  eminent  the  danger  of 
those  who,  possessing  the  means  of  arriving  at  the  knowledge  of 
the  truth,  negligently  or  wilfully  continue  in  a  state  of  separa- 
tion from  the  authorized  ministry  of  the  Church,  and  participate 
in  ordinances  administered  by  an  irregular  and  invalid  authority." 
Says  Bishop  Onderdonk  of  New  York,  "  None  but  the  Bishops 
can  unite  us  to  the  Father  in  the  way  of  Christ's  appointment ; 
and  these  Bishops  must  be  such  as  receive  their  mission  from  the 
first  commissioned  Apostles."  Other  Episcopal  writers  of  stand- 
ard authority  in  that  Church  use  such  language  as  this  :  "  The 
only  ministrations  to  which  the  Lord  has  promised  his  presence, 
are  those  of  the  Bishops  who  are  successors  of  the  first  commis- 
sioned Apostles."  "  The  real  ground  of  our  authority  is  our 
Apostolic  descent."  "  An  uninterrupted  series  of  valid  ordina- 
tions has  carried  down  the  Apostolical  succession  to  the  present 
day." 

"  Christ,"  say  the  Oxford  Tracts,  "  never  appointed  two  ways 
to  Heaven ;  nor  did  he  build  a  Church  to  save  some,  and  make 
another  institution  to  save  other  men.  There  is  no  other  name 
given  under  Heaven  among  men  whereby  we  may  be  saved,  but 
the  name  of  Jesus  ;  and  that  is  no  otherwise  given  under  Hea- 
ven than  in  the  Church"  "  It  is  not  merely  because  Episcopacy 
is  a  better,  or  more  scriptural  form  than  Presbyterianism,  *  * 
*  but  because  the  Presbyterian  ministers  have  assumed  a  power 
which  was  never  entrusted  to  them.  They  have  presumed  to 
exercise  the  power  of  ordination,  and  to  perpetuate  a  succession 
of  ministers,  without  having  received  a  commission  to  do  so.'; 
"  A  person  not  commissioned  from  the  Bishop  may  use  the 
words  of  baptism,  and  sprinkle  or  bathe ;"  *  *  "  he  may 
break  bread  and  pour  out  wine,  and  pretend  to  give  the  Lord's 
Supper,  but  it  can  afford  no  comfort  to  any  to  receive  it  at  his 
hands,  because  there  is  no  warrant  from  Christ,  to  lead  commu- 
nicants to  suppose,  that  while  he  does  so  here  upon  earth,  they 
will  be  partakers  of  the  Saviour's  heavenly  body  and  blood." 


364  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

"  As  for  the  person  himself,  who  takes  upon  himself  without 
warrant  to  minister  in  holy  things,  he  is  all  the  while  treading  in 
the  footsteps  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram,  whose  awful  pun- 
ishment you  read  of  in  the  book  of  Numbers." 

A  work  entitled  "  A  Doctrinal  Catechism  of  the  Church  of 
England,"  has  the  following  questions  and  answers: 

"  Who  appoints  dissenting  teachers  1 

"  Ans.  They  either  wickedly  appoint  each  other,  or  are  not  appoint- 
ed at  all ;  and  so  in  either  case  their  assuming  the  office  is  very  wicked. 

"  But  are  not  dissenting  teachers  thought  to  be  very  good  men  ? 

"  Ans.  They  are  often  thought  to  be  such,  and  so  were  Korah, 
Dathan,  and  Abiram,  till  God  showed  them  to  be  very  wicked. 

"  But  may  we  not  hear  them  preach  1. 

"  JIns.  No  ;  for  God  says,  depart  from  the  tents  of  these  wicked 
men." 

Says  the  author  of  a  sermon  recently  published  at  New  York  : 
"  She  [ihe  Church]  must  administer  to  you  according  to  the 
record  of  her  own  testimony."  "  Within  these  prescribed 

boundaries,  her  power  is  absolute  over  you,  so  long  as  you  re- 
main in  her  communion,  which  you  cannot  renounce,  excepting 
at  the  peril  of  your  salvation." 

The  Rev.  Palmer  Dyer,  of  Whitehall,  N.  Y.,  says,  "  No  reli- 
gious society  or  communion,  of  whatever  denomination  or  char- 
acter, is  a  Church,  unless  it  be  Episcopal."  "  We  cannot  be 
brought  into  the  Holy  Covenant,  except  in  an  Episcopal  Church  ; 
or  by  the  agency  of  an  Episcopal  ministry."  "  Those  who  pro- 
fess to  be  ministers  of  the  Gospel  without  having  received  Epis- 
copal ordination,  possess  no  more  ministerial  authority  than  any 
private  Christian."  "  Their  supposed  commission  is  a  nullity  ;" 
— "  it  involves  the  guilt  of  schism  and  rebellion."  "  Those  who 
separate  from  the  Episcopal  Church,  reviling  and  opposing  it, 
and  connecting  themselves  with  Anti-Episcopal  sects,  are  in  fact 
fighting  against  God."  "  We  can  have  no  fellowship  with  non- 
Episcopal  sects,  nor  ever  pretend  to  receive  Christian  sacraments 
from  them  ;  they  have  no  real  sacraments  to  give." 

I  have  not  excerpted  here  and  there  the  mere  slips  of  a  few  un- 
guarded writers,  but  have  taken  passages  which  express  guard- 
edly and  designedly  the  very  claims  which,  in  all  sobriety,  our 
Episcopal  neighbors  designedly  and  unwaveringly  assert.  These 
are  but  common  specimens  of  the  common  phraseology  and 
spirit  in  which  those  claims  are  advanced  at  the  present  day. 
This  is  the  actual  attitude  and  bearing  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
in  this  country,  towards  all  other  denominations  and  their  minis- 
try. The  Prelates  and  their  clergy  who  admit  anything  incon- 
sistent with  these  claims  are  few  and  far  between. 


EPISCOPAL    EXCLUSIVENESS.  365 

We  now  pass    to   THE    FUNDAMENTAL   PRINCIPLE  ON  WHICH 

THESE      CLAIMS     ARE    MADE,    TO    SHOW    THE     SUPERSTITION    WHICH 
THAT   PRINCIPLE   INVOLVES. 

That  principle,  I  affirm,  to  be  the  fundamental  principle  of 
Popery  ;  a  principle  inconsistent  with  the  essential  truth  of  the 
Gospel,  and  tending  to  its  entire  corruption  and  subversion. 

The  principle,  the  fundamental  idea,  on  which  these  excessive 
claims  of  Episcopacy  are  built,  is  that  of  regarding  the  Christian 
ministry  as  a  PRIESTHOOD,  to  work  by  virtue  of  a  ghostly  power 
conferred  in  ordination,  a  priestly  intervention  between  God  and 
man  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins ;  in  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of 
salvation  by  FAITH  ALONE. 

This  ghostly  power  is  affirmed  to  have  been  committed  to  the 
Apostles,  and  by  them  to  have  been  transmitted  exclusively  to 
their  successors  in  office,  the  Diocesan  Bishops.  This  is  the 
ground  on  which  it  is  claimed,  that  there  can  be  no  Church  with- 
out a  Bishop. 

Take  the  following  illustration  of  the  nature  and  spirit  and 
foundation  of  this  claim.  In  one  of  the  cities  of  Connecticut  is 
a  venerable  Congregational  minister  whose  labors  God  has 
owned  and  blessed  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century.  By  his 
side  is  a  stripling  in  a  surplice,  renowned  chiefly  for  a  Eulo- 
gy on  Archbishop  Laud,  and  more  recently  for  a  work  main- 
taining that  the  difference  between  Episcopacy  and  the  popular 
system  of  religion  in  New  England,  is  not  one  of  non-essentials 
of  Christianity,  but  one  affecting  "the  very  nature  and  being  of 
the  faith  ;"  in  which  work  he  intimates  the  scriptural  authority 
for  bowing'  whenever  the  name  of  Jesus  occurs  in  the  Liturgy, 
for  requiring  stated  vigils  and  fasts  by  authority  of  the  Church  ; 
for  using  the  sign  of  the  cross ;  for  saints'  days,  the  tonsure,  and 
for  the  oil  of  Chrism. 

That  venerable  Congregational  minister  is  now  regarded  as  a 
Dissenter,  a  schismatic,  a  rebel,  a  son  of  Korah ;  while  that  sur- 
pliced  stripling  is  a  true  minister  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

I  inquire  for  the  specific  difference  between  the  two.  What 
does  the  one  possess  which  the  other  has  not?  I  am  told,  that 
when  the  former  preaches,  the  Gospel  from  his  lips  conveys  no 
assurance  of  salvation  to  them  who  repent  and  believe ;  that  his 
preaching  is  unauthorized  and  invalid  ;  and  that  the  same  is 
true  of  his  baptisms,  and  his  administrations  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per ;  that  his  people  are  all  out  of  the  pale  of  covenanted  mercy, 
and  if  saved  at  all,  they  are  not  to  be  saved  on  Gospel  grounds 
or  promises,  but  by  mere  uncovenanted  mercy,  like  the  heathen  ; 
and  that  for  these  reasons  every  tyro  of  a  Deacon  in  the  Episco- 
pal Church  is  authorized,  and  by  canon  enjoined,  to  treat  that 
venerable  minister  as  an  interloper  and  an  impostor ;  and  utterly 


366  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

forbidden  to  treat  or  regard  him  as  a  true  minister  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ. 

I  ask  why  is  this?  What  has  that  stripling,  which  this  vene- 
rable minister  has  not ;  the  possession  of  which  causes  this  amaz- 
ing difference  in  the  validity  of  their  acts  ?  I  am  told  that  it  is 
this  :  A  certain  Bishop  has  had  on  his  head  the  hands  of  a  man, 
who  has  had  on  his  head  the  hands  of  another,  and  he  of  another 
man,  and  so  on — clear  back  to  the  Apostles  ;  that  through  this 
chain  of  conductors  a  virtue  has  flowed;  which  that  Bishop  has 
communicated  to  that  stripling  by  laying  his  hands  on  his 
head. 

Absurd  and  ridiculous  as  this  statement  appears,  it  is  not  only 
the  grave  doctrine  of  Episcopacy,  but  the  very  foundation  of  all 
its  monstrous  claims. 

Having  already  traced  the  foundation  of  this  doctrine  in  the 
Judicious  Hooker,  the  next  author  whom  I  shall  quote  is  Law, 
who  became  famous  in  the  celebrated  Bangorian  controversy 
in  the  reign  of  George  I.  Many  suppose  that  Puseyism  is  a 
"  Novelty"  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  and  so  Bishop  Hopkins 
affects  to  treat  it.*  You  have  seen  it  to  be  the  dominant  doc- 
trine of  Episcopacy  in  the  days  of  Elizabeth.  You  have  seen 
it  ripening  and  symbolizing  still  more  closely  with  Popery,  under 
Archbishop  Laud.  It  became  rampant  once  more  in  the  High 
Church  days  of  Queen  Anne  ;  and  the  specimen  which  I  shall 
now  give  you  is  taken  from  the  days  of  the  First  King  George. 
The  trait  here  furnished  is  not  indeed  an  incident  in  the  history 
of  High  Church  Episcopacy;  it  runs  throughout — constituting 
the  very  life-blood  of  its  existence. 

The  Work  of  Law  was  written  on  this  wise  :  Hoadley,  Bishop 
of  Bangor,  in  preaching  before  King  George  I.  asserted  the  su- 
preme authority  of  Christ,  as  king  in  his  own  kingdom ;  denying 
that  he  had  delegated  his  power  to  any  deputies  or  vicegerents. 
He  afterwards  published  his  "  Preservatives,"  in  which  he  under- 
took to  oppose  what  he  considered  the  fundamental  principles  of 
temporal  and  spiritual  despotism.  In  one  word,  you  will  per- 
ceive that  the  tenets  which  he  opposed,  were  the  same  as  those 
of  the  modern  Puseyism. 

Law  became  the  Church  champion  against  Hoadley  ;  and  his 
work  is  of  the  highest  authority  among  all  Episcopalians  of  the 
present  day. 

Hoadley  had  said,  in  opposition   to  the  notion   of   ghostly 
power  claimed  by  the  priesthood,   that   "  to  expect  the  grace  of 
God  from  any  hands  but  his  own,  is  to  affront  Him :"   *   *     * 
"  Human  benedictions,  and  human  excommunications,  have  no- 
thing to  do  with  the  favor  of  God." 

*  "  Novelties  which  disturb  our  peace." 


EPISCOPAL    EXCLUSIVENES3.  367 

Upon  this,  Law  replies,  "  It  is  evident  from  the  maxim  (for 
your  Lordship  asserts  it  as  such),  that  whatever  institutions  are 
observed  in  any  human  society,  upon  this  supposition,  that  there- 
by GRACE  is  CONFERRED  by  human  hands,  or  by  the  ministry  of  the 
clergy — ought  to  be  condemned ;  and  are  condemned  by  your 
Lordship."  Upon  this  he  makes  a  home  thrust  at  Bishop  Hoad- 
ley,  from  the  offices  of  the  Church  under  which  the  Bishop  was 
ordained •;  the  office  of  ordination  containing  the  words  "  Re- 
ceive the  Holy  Ghost?  and  pretending  to  confer  the  Holy  Ghost 
in  the  ceremonial  of  ordination.  "  The  Bishop,  says  Law, 
"  laying  his  hands  on  the  person's  head,  saith,  receive  the  Holy 
Ghost  for  the  office  work  of  a  priest."  "  From  this,"  says  Law, 
"  it  is  plain  (1.)  that  the  reception  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  necessary  to 
constitute  a  Christian  priest :  (2.)  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  conferred 
through  human  hands.  If,  therefore,  your  Lordship  is  right  in 
your  doctrine,  the  Church  of  England  is  evidently  most  corrupt. 
For  if  it  be  dishonorable  and  affronting  to  God  >to  expect  his 
grace  from  human  hands,  it  must  of  necessity  be  dishonorable 
and  affronting  to  God,  for  a  Bishop  to  pretend  to  confer  it  by  his 
hands" 

"  Suppose,"  says  he,  "  your  Lordship  was  to  have  been  conse- 
crated to  the  office  of  Bishop  by  these  words :  "  Take  thou  power 
to  sustain  all  things  in  being,  given  thee  by  my  hands  :  I  suppose 
your  Lordship  would  think  it  entirely  unlawful  to  submit  to  the 
terms  of  such  an  ordination.  But,  my  Lord,  receive,  the  Holy 
Ghost,  is  as  impious  a  form  according  to  your  Lordship's  doc- 
trine, and  equally  injurious  to  the  Eternal  power  and  Godhead 
as  the  other." 

Law  proceeds  :  "  Suppose  your  Lordship  had  been  preaching 
to  the  Laity  against  the  authority  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  yet 
should  acquiesce  in  the  condition  of  being  made  a  Bishop  in  her 
name,  and  by  recognizing  her  power :  could  such  a  submission 
be  consistent  with  sincerity?  Here  you  forbid  the  laity  to  ex- 
pect God's  grace  from  any  hands  but  his;  yet  not  only  accept 
office  upon  a  supposition  of  the  contrary  doctrine,  but  oblige 
yourself,  according  to  .the  sense  of  the  Church  wherein  you  are 
ordained  as  Bishop,  to  act  frequently  in  opposition  to  your  own 
principles."* 

*  It  is  but  a  few  days  since  a  Protestant  paper  in  New  York,  describing  an  ordi- 
nation by  the  Popish  Bishop,  spoke  of  the  solemn  effect  of  the  u  thrilling  words  " 
"  Receive  the  Holy  Ghost."  To  my  mind  it  was  horrible  and  blasphemous,  that  a 
man,  pretending  to  act  by  virtue  of  ghostly  power  running  down  through  a  succes- 
sion of  monsters  of  impiety  and  pollution,  all  red  with  the  blood  of  saints  and  mar- 
tyrs for  a  thousand  years — should  pretend  to  have  power  officially  to  confer  the 
Holy  Ghost!  To  me  it  seemed  a  horrible  attempt  at  aping  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in 
his  omnipotent  power.  Nor  was  the  impression  more  favorable  when  I  read  an 
account  of  the  same  words  being  used  at  the  ordination  of  the  present  Bishop  of  the 
Protestant  Diocese  of  Massachusetts.  The  nature  of  the  claim— viz.  the  power  offi- 


368  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Law  proceeds  to  show  the  claim  made  by  the  Church  to  con- 
vey. God's  grace  by  human  hands  in  the  office  of  confirmation. 
"  The  design  of  this  institution,"  says  he,  "  is  that  it  should  be  the 
means  of  conferring  grace  by  the  prayer,  and  imposition  of  the 
Bishop's  hands  on  those  who  have  already  been  baptized." 
"  When  the  Bishop  is  said  to  confer  grace  in  confirmation,  this 
is  properly  an  authoritative  benediction.'''  "  In  this  sense  the 
people  are  said  to  be  authoritatively  blessed  by  the  regular  clergy, 
because  by  their  hands  the  people  receive  the  grace  of  God's 
ordinances. 

So,  when  the  Bishop  or  the  priest  pronounces  the  customary 
benediction,  Law  says,  "  We  do  not  consider  this  barely  as  an 
act  of  charity  and  humanity,  of  one  Christian  praying  for  an- 
other, but  as  the  work  of  a  person  who  is  commissioned  by  God 
to  bless  in  his  name,  and  to  be  effectually  ministerial  in  the  con- 
veyance of  his  grace" 

Concerning  the  Lord's  Supper,  Law  asks,  as  though  the  pow- 
er of  the  sacrament  were  indubitable,  "  Can  God  consecrate 
inanimate  things  to  spiritual  purposes,  and  make  them  the  means 
of  eternal  happiness  ?" 

Of  the  pretended  absolution  used  by  the  priests  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  Hoadley  had  said,  "  The  same  you  will  find  a  sufficient 
reply  to  their  presumptuous  claim  to  an  authoritative  absolution. 
An  infallible  absolution  cannot  belong  to  fallible  men."  To  this 
Law  replies,  "Is  it  not  as  easy  to  conceive  that  our  Lord  should 
confer  his  grace  of  pardon  by  the  hands  of  his  ministers,  as  by 
means  of  the  sacraments  ?  And  may  not  such  an  absolution  be 
justly  called  authoritative?" 

Hoadley  had  said,  "  But  to  claim  a  right  to  stand  in  God's 
stead,  in  such  a  sense  that  they  can  absolutely  and  certainly  bless 
with  their  voice  alone  ;  this  is  the  highest  absurdity  and  blasphe- 
my, as  it  supposes  God  to  place  a  set  of  men  above  himself; 
and  to  put  out  of  his  own  hands,  the  disposal  of  his  blessing  and 
curse."  To  this  Law  replies  :  "  Now  if  it  has  pleased  God  to 
confer  the  Holy  Ghost  in  ordination  and  confirmation,  and  only 
by  them,  &c.,  and  to  annex  the  grace  of  pardon  to  the  imposition 
of  their  hands  on  returning  sinners  ;  is  it  any  blasphemy  to  claim 
and  to  exert  their  power?"  Again  and  again  he  speaks  of  "  an- 
nexing grace  to  sacraments,"  and  making  them  "  necessary  to 
salvation."  "  Now,  my  Lord,"  says  he,  "  these  are  the  sacerdotal 
prayers  which  your  lordship  encourages  the  laity  to  despise. 
Your  lordship  sets  up,  in  this  controversy,  against  the  arrogant 
pretences  and  false  claims  of  the  clergy." 

cially  and  authoritatively  to  confer  the  Holy  Ghost — whether  uttered  by  Popish  or 
Protestant  lips  taken  in  connection  with  the  claims  of  Diocesan  Bishops,  sounds 
in  my  ears  horrible  and  discordant — nearly  resembling  blasphemy. 


EPISCOPAL    EXCLUSIVENESS.  369 

From  these  powers  and  functions  of  the  priesthood,  he  argues 
the  "  absolute  necessity  of  a  strict  succession  of  authorized 
ordainers,  from  the  Apostolic  times?  to  constitute  a  Christian 
priest." 

Now  compare  with  this  system  of  Law,  the  following  creed 
of  the  "  New  York  Churchman,"  the  organ  of  the  Bishop  of  that 
Diocese,  and  the  expositor  of  the  views  of  the  majority  of  its  laity 
and  clergy.  "  A  ministry  of  the  Apostolic  succession,  empow- 
ered to  act  as  Christ's  ambassadors  and  representatives  on  earth  ; 
the  divinely  appointed  limitation  of  the  blessings  of  salvation  and 
the  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  communion  with  this  ministry  in 
the  sacraments  arid  word  and  ordinances  of  the  Church  ;  regene- 
ration in  baptism  ;  salvation  suspended  on  faith  and  good  works  ; 
the  supreme  authority  of  Scripture  as  explained  and  interpreted 
by  the  Church ;  these  are  the  principles  which  are  plainly  writ- 
ten in  our  Prayer-Book,  and  these  we  are  resolved,  by  God's 
grace,  to  maintain  both  in  life  and  death." 

Coincident  with  these  views,  are  the  doctrines  of  a  sermon 
preached  A.D.  1843,  before  the  convention  of  the  Diocese  of 
North  Carolina,  entitled  "  Sacerdotal  Absolution,"  which  teaches 
that  "  it  is  the  explicit  sense  of  our  Church  that  the  power  of  re- 
mission and  retention  [of  sins]  is  as  permanent  as  the  ministry, 
and  is  an  essential  prerogative  of  the  sacerdotal  office  ;"  that  "  to 
remit  sins,"  is  to  be  understood  in  its  literal  acceptation;  and  that 
"  such  was  the  understanding  of  our  Church  when  the  Liturgy 
was  prepared  ;"  "  that  a  power  was  given  [to  Apostles  and  their 
successors]  over  DOCTRINES  and  PERSONS  ;"  "  with  the  specific 
power  of  retaining  and  remitting'  sins ;"  that  to  him  who  is 
loosed  by  the  priesthood  "  heaven  is  opened,  to  him  who  is 
bound,  heaven  is  shut ;"  that  with  regard  to  "  Absolution,"  "  God 
having  appointed  an  order  of  men  in  the  world  for  accomplish- 
ing his  gracious  purposes  of  mercy  toward  mankind,  makes  them 
his  agents  in  conferring  the  blessings  which  he  has  in  store  for 
them  ;"  that  in  absolving  sins,  the  minister,  "  as  representative  of 
Christ,  does  what  Christ  himself  would  do  under  the  same  cir- 
cumstances ;"  that  his  "  sovereign  will  ratify  the  acts  of  his  min- 
isters as  much  as  if  they  were  done  by  himself;"  that  "the 
final  purpose  of  Christ's  kingdom  on  earth  being  the  remission 
of  the  sins  of  men,  and  his  ministers  being  the  authorized  agents 
for  fulfilling  its  offices,  who  therefore  act  in  his  name  and  in  his 
stead,  their  acts  done  with  their  authority  will  be  ratified  and 
sealed  by  him  as  effectually  as  though  done  without  their  imme- 
diate agency."  "  And  hence  it  may  be  properly  urged,  of  what 
special  and  positive  value' is  a  ministry,  if  its  service  be  only  of 
incidental  benefit,  such  as  might  ensue  from  the  sober  action  of 
any  man  whatever,  and  not  of  an  appointed  and  certain  efficacy, 
24 


370  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES.       . 

one  to  which  mankind,  encouraged  and  fortified  by  the  promise 
of  God,  can  confidently  resort  as  the  divinely  authorized  'agent 
for  dispensing  grace  to  the  soul.  *  *  A  true  authority  im- 
plies either  an  inherent  or  accompanying  power,  which  is  com- 
petent to  all  the  purposes  for  which  it  is  held ;  *  *  that  is,  in 
the  present  instance,  the  ministry  have  either  an  inherent  or  ac- 
companying' power  to  FORGIVE  SINS,  by  pronouncing  the  formula 
of  absolution  /" 

Such  is  the  doctrine  of  all  Churchmen  who  regard  their 
Church  as  having  a  divine  and  exclusive  right.  It  is  the  doc- 
trine, not  so  much  of  Pasey,  as  of  the  Church  itself.  The 
Church  compels  all  her  ministers,  high  or  low,  to  act  in  accordance 
with  it,  in  denying  all  other  ministers  to  be  ordained.  It  acts 
out  the  same  system  in  ordaining  over  again  all  ministers  who 
come  to  their  fold  from  the  Protestant  ranks,  and  in  receiving 
without  re-ordination  all  priests  who  come  to  them  from  the 
Church  of  Rome.  There  are  indeed  evangelical  ministers  in  the 
Episcopal  Church,  who  reject  these  views,  but  Mr.  Barnes  has 
well  shown  their  "  position."*  The  Church  is  against  them.  Its 
offices  compel  them  to  belie  their  sentiments,  at  every  baptism, 
confirmation,  and  ordination.  The  system  here  set  forth,  is  es- 
sentially the  system  of  Popery ;  it  is  inconsistent  with  Protestant- 
ism, and  with  the  Reformation.  And  yet  this  is  the  very  basis 
of  all  the  exclusive  Episcopal  claims ;  a  pestilent  superstition  ; 
the  sum  and  essence  of  the  great  anti-christian  apostasy  of  Rome. 
No  one  can  even  begin  to  talk  about  valid  ORDINATION,  valid  or- 
dinances, and  Apostolical  succession,  till  his  head  is  first  filled 
with  the  fundamental  principles  of  Popery. 

Words  cannot  express  my  astonishment,  that  such  claims,  and 
such  doctrines,  should  find  any  countenance  or  toleration  in  any- 
thing pretending  to  call  itself  a  Protestant  Church.  What  wild- 
ness  of  fanaticism,  what  depths  of  delusion,  what  ravings  of  mad- 
ness, go  anything  beyond  this  quiescent  and  complacent  fanati- 
cism, whicji  coolly  pretends  to  Apostolical  succession,  with  power 
to  confer  grace  to  impart  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  authoritatively  to 
absolve  sins  !  Yet,  this  is  the  system  of  High  Church  Episco- 
pacy, and  has  ever  been  so,  from  the  days  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
to  the  present  day. 

*  See-  Barnes  on  the  position  of  the  evangelical  party  in  the  Episcopal  Church, 
in  the  New  Englander. 


XXX. 


APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION,  CORRUPT  AS  A 
DOCTRINE,  FALSE  IN  FACT. 

THE  basis  of  the  Episcopal  doctrine  of  Apostolical  succession  is 
the  idea,  that  the  Christian  ministry  is  a  Priesthood,  whose  office 
is  less  to  preach  the  Gospel,  than  to  PROPITIATE  GOD  by  the  ex- 
ercise of  priestly  functions;  and  to  be  the  indispensable  and 
efficient  instruments  of  CONVEYING  TO  MEN  THE  GRACE  OF  GOD 

BY    THE    MINISTRATION    OF    SACRAMENTS. 

This  mystic  "  virtue,"  it  is  pretended,  is  received  in  ordination  ; 
being  conveyed  down  from  the  Apostles,  exclusively  through  the 
order  of  Bishops,  to  the  priesthood  of  the  present  day.  A  mere 
Presbyter  is  a  non-conductor.  Should  he  pretend  to  ordain,  the 
"virtue"  is  not  imparted  ;  the  chain  is  broken. 

Valid  ordination,  and  valid  sacraments,  consist  in  this  ;  that 
when  other  men  consecrate  the  elements  in  the  Lord's  Supper, 
these  elements  fail  to  become  sacrament  ally  the  Lord's  body  and 
blood,  and  can  furnish  no  spiritual  benefit  and  comfort.  Other 
men  may  preach  the  Gospel,  but  there  is  no  covenanted  mercy 
to  tho.-?e  who  believe  the  Gospel  so  preached ;  and  who  repent 
of  their  sins,  and  serve  God  in  the  communion  of  these  men  un- 
ordained  by  virtue  of  the  Apostolical  succession.  But  the  ordain- 
ed priesthood,  when  they  preach,  actually  pledge  God  to  fulfil  the 
promises  of  the  Gospel  to  those  who  embrace  them ;  their 
preaching  is  valid;  when  they  consecrate  the  elements  in  the 
Lord's  Supper,  they  make  them  effectual  means,  as  well  as 
authoritative  signs,  of  grace.  When  they  pronounce  the  bene- 
diction, the  people  are  authoritatively  blessed ;  and  when  they 
pronounce  the  absolution,  it  becomes  valid  on  earth  and  in 
heaven ;  the  sinner  is  truly,  authoritatively,  and  effectually  ab- 
solved from  his  sins.* 

*  To  the  proofs  of  these  Episcopal  dogmas,  given  in  the  last  lecture,  the  follow- 
ing may  be  added  from  that  choice  Churchman,  Bishop  Whittingham  of  Maryland: 
"  The  ministry  of  the  Christian  Priesthood  in  the  word  and  sacraments,  is  equiva- 
lent in  its  nature  and  efficacy  to  that  of  the  Jewish  priesthood,  in  offering  of  animal 
and  other  sacrifices.  Christ's  own  availing  blood  is  avouched  and  pledged  by  the 
outward  act  of  his  REPRESENTATIVE,  THE  PRIEST."  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as- 
serted his  claim  to  power,  as  a  man  sent  from  the  Father,  to  forgive  sins.  Now 


372  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

These  are  the  claims  of  Episcopacy  in  behalf  of  the  preroga- 
tives of  Apostolical  succession.  These  are  the  avowed  grounds 
of  the  necessity  of  that  succession. 

Bishop  Brownell,  in  his  charge,  says  of  this  doctrine  of  Apos- 
tolical succession,  that  "  no  doctrine  is  more  universally  re- 
ceived by  the  whole  body  of  our  Church ;"  and  that  he  "  knows 
not  a  single  clergyman  who  rejects  it."  On  this  ground 
he  boldly  rests  an  issue  concerning  the  whole  claims  of  Episco- 
pacy. 

"  If,"  says  Bishop  Brownell,  "  a  regular  ministerial  succession 
in  the  order  of  Bishops  be  not  conformable  to  Scripture  and 
Apostolic  usage,  Episcopacy  is  an  unjustifiable  usurpation" 

I  accept  this  issue  ;  and  affirm  that  this  doctrine  of  Apostolical 
succession  is,  as  to  its  very  basis,  fundamentally  contradictory 
both  to  Scripture  and  to  reason  ;  that  the  dogma  upon  which  it  is 
built,  is  subversive  of  the  true  Gospel,  and  is  the  fundamental 
dogma  of  Popery ;  and  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  this  pretended 
succession  in  the  order  of  Diocesan  Bishops,  is  both  false  and 
absurd. 

If  these  positions  can  be  sustained,  then  by  the  terms  of  Bishop 

what  he  so  claimed,  we  find  that  he  afterwards  conveyed  in  the  most  explicit  terms 
to  those  whom  he  left  to  represent  himin  the  Church."  "  Eating  his  flesh  and  drink- 
ing his  blood  in  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  is  the  pre-requisite  to  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
which  the  Saviour  gave  his  Apostles  and  their  successors  power  to  minister" 

With  regard  to  Baptism,  our  Episcopal  neighbors  are  at  some  loss,  and  in  no  small 
perplexity.  They  claim  that  baptism  confers  regeneration.  "  The  true  economy  of 
the  Christian  religion,"  says  Bishop  Brownell,  "  regards  men  by  nature  as  the 
CHILDREN  OF  WRATH.  It  takes  them  from  this  state,  which  is  called  in  Scripture, 
'  The  kingdom  of  Satan,' and  TRANSFERS  THEM  BY  BAPTISM  unto  the  family,  house- 
hold, and  kingdom  of  the  Saviour."  The  baptism,  he  says,  makes  them  "  in  deed 
and  in  truth,  children  of  God,  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  And  yet  they 
admit  the  baptism  of  other  ministers,  as  lay  baptism,  and  do  not  ordinarily  re- 
baptize.  It  is,  therefore,  in  their  view,  valid,  and  if  there  is  no  other  way  to  get  out 
of  the  "  kingdom  of  Satan,"  than  by  baptism,  and  if  lay  baptism  is  not  valid,  then 
several  of  the  most  considerable  Bishops  of  the  Episcopal  Church  are  yet  "  children 
of  wrath,"  and  subjects  of  the  kingdom  of  Satan  ;  having  received  none  other  than 
(in  their  view)  lay  baptism. 

Now  one  would  think  that  taking  a  child  of  wrath  out  of  the  kingdom  of  Satan, 
and  converting  him  in  deed  and  in  truth  into  a  child  of  God,  and  an  heir  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  must  be  one  of  the  most  stupendous  works  to  be  achieved  by 
any  priesthood.  What  priest  of  the  Apostolical  succession  can  do  more  ?  And  yet 
this  it  is  admitted  is  done  by  lay  baptism!  But  how  is  it.  that  the  child  so  bap- 
tized and  made  a  child  of  the  covenant,  is  still  destitute  of  the  covenanted  mercies 
of  God  ?  There  seems  to  be  some  discrepancy  between  the  claims  and  doctrines 
of  Prelacy  here. 

It  is  said  that  the  irregular  baptism  is  "  confirmed"  and  rendered  valid  in  the  con- 
firmation administered  by  the  Bishop.  This  has  been  gravely  argued  by  no  less  a 
man  than  the  learned  Dr.  Jarvis.  But  to  this  it  has  been  well  replied,  "  Was  that 
irregularly  baptized  person  in  deed  and  in  truth  regenerated  in  that  irregular  bap- 
tism ?  If  so,  does  confirmation  regenerate  him  over  again  ?  Is  the  confirmation 
necessary  in  order  to  render  that  regeneration  which  is  already  so  ?  Or  if  he  was 
not  regenerated  in  the  irregular  baptism,  then  the  baptism  was  a  nullity  —  a 
nothing;  does  the  confirmation  make  that  a  regeneration  which  was  nothing? 
And  since  confirmation  is  confessedly  no  regenerating  ordinance,  how  can  it  make 
that  a  valid  regeneration  which  was  no  regeneration  at  all  ?" 


APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION.  373 

Brownell's  alternative,  "  Episcopacy  is  an  unjustifiable  usurpa- 
tion." 

Protestantism  and  Popery  are  two  great  antagonistic  and  irre- 
concileable  systems  ;  not  of  order  and  polity,  merely — but  in  the 
fundamental  doctrines  of  the  respective  schemes.  Protestantism 
sends  the  inquirer  for  salvation,  directly  to  God's  Word  for  in- 
struction ;  and  directly  to  Christ  alone  for  help.  Her  doctrine  is, 
Justification  by  faith  alone,  requiring  the  soul  only  to  embrace 
and  obey  the  Gospel,  without  resorting  at  all  to  the  intervention 
of  a  human  priesthood  as  essential  to  salvation.  Popery  says, 
No :  you  cannot  go  to  the  Bible  alone  for  instruction ;  nor  to 
Christ  directly  and  alone  for  help.  You  cannot  be  justified  by 
faith  alone,  you  must  have  the  help  of  a  human  priesthood  with 
its  valid  sacraments,  or  you  cannot  be  saved. 

Here,  then,  are  the  two  schemes  of  salvation  ;  justification  by 
faith  alone;  and  justification  by  priestly  intervention  for  the  for- 
giveness of  sins.  The  last  is  the  fundamental  principle  in  the 
dogma  of  the  Apostolical  succession,  as  held  both  by  Papists 
and  by  so  called  Protestant  Episcopalians.  Which  doctrine  is 
"  conformable  to  Scripture  and  Apostolical  usage  ?" 

The  Apostle  Paul  says,  "  Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize,  but  to 
preach  the  Gospel/'  How  strangely  Paul  talks,  cries  the  Priest 
of  the  Apostolical  succession  :  "  Sent  me  not  to  baptize  !"  Why 
"the  true  economy  of  the  Christian  religion,"  says  Bishop 
Brownell,  "takes"  men  "from  the  kingdom  of  Satan,"  and  from 
"children  of  wrath"  it  "transfers  them  BY  BAPTISM  into 
the  family,  household  and  kingdom  of  the  Saviour  !"  Paul  sent 
not  to  baptize  !  Why,  Christ  sent  me  to  BAPTIZE,  cries  the  High 
Churchman  :  preaching  is  but  a  subordinate  affair.  And  there- 
upon, Bishop  Whittingham  raises  his  voice:  "  Ministerial  inter- 
vention for  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  is  the  ESSENCE  of  the  Priest- 
hood." 

"  And  hath  given  us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation,"  says  the 
Apostle  Paul.  What,  then,  is  the  essence  of  that  ministry  ? 
Baptisms?  Confirmations?  Sacraments?  Priestly  absolutions? 
Ministerial  interventions  ?  So  says  the  Apostolical  succession. 
But  the  Apostle  Paul  denies  it.  He  talks  not  of  the  sacraments  of 
reconciliation  ;  but  when  he  speaks  of  the  "  ministry  of  reconci- 
liation," he  adds,  "  And  hath  committed  unto  us  the  WORD  of 
reconciliation"  "  So  then,"  cries  the  Apostle  Paul,  "  Faith 
cometh  by  HEARING,  and  hearing  by  the  WORD  OF  GOD."  "Of 
his  own  will  begat  he  us  by  the  WORD  OF  TRUTH."  Baptismal 
regeneration!  Paul  makes  a  distinction  heaven-wide  between 
baptism  and  regeneration  :  "  For  in  Christ  Jesus  neither  circum- 
cision availeth  anything,  nor  uncircumcision,  but  a  new  creature" 
Circumcision  (or  baptism,  its  substitute)  then  is  no  part  of  the 


374  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

new  creature,  and  does  not,  in  this  respect,  avail  "  anything :" — 
In  the  account  of  Apostolical  succession,  however,  baptism  avail- 
eth  everything :  it  takes  the  children  of  wrath  and  "  transfers  " 
them  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 

The  scheme  of  Paul  makes  nothing  of  priestly  intervention, 
and  much  of  faith  :  it  makes  very  little  indeed  of  any  priestly 
prerogatives  or  interventions,  in  the  matter  of  forgiveness  of  sins. 
Accordingly  he  says,  "  Who  then  is  Paul,  or  who  is  Apollos,  but 
ministers  BY  WHOM  YE  BELIEVED  ?"  Who  is  Paul !  Who  ?  Our 
ministers  are  more  than  that:  they  are  ministers  by  whose  priest- 
ly interventions  and  valid  sacraments  ye  were  "  transferred  from 
the  kingdom  of  Satan,  into  the  household,  family  and  kingdom 
of  Christ."  Who  is  Paul  1  who  is  Apollos  ? — Our  ministers  are 
somebody.  They  have  received  their  commission  from  Bishops, 
who  have  received  their  commission  from  other  Bishops,  who 
have  received  theirs  from  others,  clear  back,  till  the  authority 
comes  at  last  directly  from  the  Apostles. 

Paul  was  an  Apostle  himself.  His  commission  came  through 
no  dubious  links  of  a  dubious  succession.  He  was  not  com- 
pelled to  show  a  diploma  of  power  received  from  a  succession 
running  back  through  monsters  of  iniquity  all  over  blackened 
with  lust  and  crimsoned  with  blood.  He  was  an  Apostle  "  nei- 
ther by  man  nor  through  man,"  but  by  the  direct  calling  of  God. 
And  yet  Paul  could  say,  "  so  then  neither  is  he  that  planteth 
anything,  neither  he  that  watereth ;  but  God  that  giveth  the  in- 
crease." He  cuts  up  the  claims  of  High- Church  Prelates  by  the 
roots,  and  throws  them  to  the  winds.  He  rejects  the  dogma  on 
which  they  build  their  arrogant  claims,  and  counts  it  another 
Gospel. 

Such  is  the  dogma  of  Apostolical  succession  AS  A  DOCTRINE  : 
false,  contradictory  to  the  Scriptures,  and  subversive  of  the  Gos- 
pel :  the  very  opposite,  and  fundamentally  opposite,  to  the  scheme 
of  salvation  preached  by  the  Apostles,  and  recorded  in  the  Word 
of  God. 

Let  us  now  test  it  by  applying  it  to  practice. 

A  man  wishes  to  examine  the  grounds  of  his  hope  of  personal 
acceptance  with  Christ. 

The  Bible  says,  "  Let  a  man  examine  himself."  "  Examine 
your  own  selves,  WHETHER  YE  BE  IN  THE  FAITH.  Prove  your 
own  selves. '  O  no,  says  the  Churchman  ;— not  your  "own 
selves ;" — not  "  whether  ye  be  in  the  FAITH  ;" — but  examine  the 
Diploma  of  your  Priest:  examine  whether  ye  be  IN  THE  CHURCH; 
in  the  words  of  our  Right  Reverend  Father  in  God  Bishop  Ho- 
bart;  "  Let  it  be  thy  SUPREME  CARE,  O  my  soul,  to  receive  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour,  only  from  the  hands 
of  those  who  derive  their  authority  by  REGULAR  TRANSMISSION 


APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION,  375 

from  Chflsu"  "  Where  the  Gospel  is  proclaimed,  communion 
with  the  Church,  by  participation  of  its  ordinances  at  the  hands 
of  an  AUTHORIZED  PRIESTHOOD,  is  the  indispe'nsable  condition  of 
salvation" 

It  will  not  do,  therefore,  for  the  devotee  of  Prelacy  to  "know 
nothing  but  Christ  and  him  crucified."     The  Gospel,  alone,  can- 
not afford  him  a  valid  promise  of  salvation.     It  is  equally  impor- 
tant for  him  to  show  something  about  "  the  Church?  and  the 
"  endless  genealogies  "  of  the  "  succession."     The  diploma  of 
his  priest  is  of   equal  consequence  to  him  with  the   Gospel; 
since,  if  the  pedigree  of  his  priest  is  defective,  he  can  have  no 
more  assurance  of  salvation  than  a  heathen.      And   though  it 
would  appear  somewhat  ridiculous,  for  a  Christian  Priest,  when 
a  poor  sinner  asks,  "What  shall  I  do  to  be  saved  ?"  to  hold  up  his 
spiritual  pedigree  for  that  sinner's  examination ;  yet,  to  be  consis- 
tent, he  ought  in  all  reason  never  to  omit  it*     He  should  take  the 
table  of   the  genealogies,  as  officially  published  by  the   Tract 
Society  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  or  by  Chapin,  and 
holding  it  up  before  the  inquirer,  he  should  say,  "  Behold  here, 
the  security  for  salvation,  through  the  Gospel  preached  and  sacra- 
ments administered  by  me  !     See  here,  that  sacraments  adminis- 
tered by  me  are  genuine.     See  how  the  succession  runs  :  VALENS, 
DOLCHIANUS,  NARCISSUS,  Dius,  GORDIAS,  NARCISSUS  again;  ALEX- 
ANDER, MAZABANES,  HYMEN^EUS,  ZAMBDAS"  "GURNEL,LENDWITH, 
GORNWIST,  GORWAN,  CLENDAKE,EYNY^:N,  ELUDG.ETH,  ELVAOTH, 
MAELSCHEWITH,"  and  so  on.     Do  you  understand  ?     These  are 
links  in  the  "  succession."     Through  links  like  these,  power  has 
come  down  to  Bishop  Brownell,  Bishop  Onderdonk,  Bishop  Mc- 
Coskry,  and  to  Bishop  Hughes.     Through  the  hands  of  such  a 
Bishop,  the  virtue  has  come  down  tome.     If  you  have  been  bap- 
tized, and  have  received  the  Lord's  Supper  by  my  hands,  or  by  the 
hands  of  some  one  like  me  validly  ordained,  and  no  special  un- 
belief or  wickedness  hinders,  you  have  become  indeed  and  in 
truth  a  child  of  God.     But  if  your  minister  was  not  of  this  suc- 
cession, no  matter  how  sincerely  you  may  repent  and  believe  the 
Gospel,  the  Gospel  contains  no  covenant,  or  promise,  or  revealed 
provision,  by  which  you  may  be  saved.     Examine,  therefore, 
your  Priest's  spiritual  pedigree ;  and  as  Bishop  Hobart  says, 
"  Let  it  be  thy  supreme  care" 

Now,  with  regard  to  this  system,  I  say  it  is  the  antagonist 
system  both  of  Protestantism  and  of  Christianity.  It  is  funda- 
mentally corrupt  and  anti-christian.  It  is  essential  Popery  ;  not 
indeed  in  submission  to  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope,  for  this  is 
but  a  circumstance  in  the  scheme  ;  it  is  Popery,  inasmuch  as  it 
holds  out  the  way  of  justification,  not  by  faith  alone,  but  by  the 
efficiency  of  priestly  prerogatives  and  offices.  When  you  have 


376 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


turned  the  poor  sinner  away  from  Christ  alone,  to  the  sacraments, 
and  to  Ihe  efficacy  of  priestly  interventions,  you  have  adopted  all 
that  is  fundamental  in  the  system  of  Popery.  Auricular  confes- 
sion, penances,  absolutions,  and  extreme  unction,  are  mere  ap- 
pendages to  the  scheme.  The  Greek  Church,  arid  other  corrupt 
forms  of  Christianity,  though  they  differ  in  minor  things  from  the 
Roman,  yet  agree  with  it  in  this,  that  they  make  justification 
dependent  upon  priestly  offices  and  prerogatives,  and  with  these 
the  High  Church  scheme  (of  late  called  the  Puseyistic)  fully 
agrees.  Go  the  world  over,  and  you  find  that  system  the  fruitful 
mother  of  superstitions,  the  natural  tendency  of  which  is,  to  ob- 
literate the  true  character  of  the  Gospel,  and  to  bind  men  in  the 
chains  of  spiritual  despotism.  The  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
alone,  in  opposition  to  the  dogma  of  justification  by  priestly  offices 
and  interventions,  was  the  great  doctrine  of  the  Reformation.  Lu- 
ther declared  it  "  THE  ARTICLE  OF  A  STANDING,  OR  OF  A  FALLING 
CHURCH."  The  Oxford  Tractarians  understand  this  well,  and 
hesitate  not  to  declare  that  the  Reformation,  in  its  fundamental 
principle,  is  to  be  abandoned.  I  repeat  it ;  the  very  source  of 
all  the  abominations  of  Popery,  is  this  doctrine  of  justification  by 
priestly  offices,  the  doctrine  fundamentally  involved  in  the  dogma 
of  Apostolical  succession.  All  the  other  corruptions  of  Popery 
are  mere  adjuncts  and  trappings  of  the  scheme  ;  mere  satellites 
of  this  great  planet  of  darkness.  Whenever  a  man  begins  to 
talk  about  valid  ordinances,  valid  sacraments,  valid  ministry, 
and  Apostolical  succession,  he  is,  in  principle,  no  longer 
a  Protestant  ;  henceforth,  he  appropriately  belongs  to  the 
same  generic  class  with  the  followers  of  the  Pope.  With  Lut 
ther,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  declare  the  doctrine  of  JUSTIFICATION 
BY  FAITH  ALONE  the  "  Articulus  vel  stantis  vel  cadentis  ecclesice" 
the  point  of  demarkation  between  a  standing  or  an  Apostate 
Church.  This  was  the  great  battle  ground  of  the  Reformation  ; 
and  it  is  my  deep  conviction  that  on  this  ground  that  battle  is  to 
be  fought  again.  It  is  to  be  the  great  contest  of  the  age ;  per- 
haps of  several  ages  to  come.  The  advocates  of  Prelacy  have 
fairly  and  unequivocally  taken  their  ground,  precisely  where  the 
Pope  and  the  Cardinals  stood,  when  Luther  raised  his  voice  for 
the  great  article  of  a  standing  or  a  falling  Church.  It  is  no  dis- 
pute about  robes,  or  liturgies,  or  ceremonies,  or  Lent,  or  Easter, 
or  saints'  days,  or  angels'  days,  that  is  to  determine  this  conflict; 
no,  nor  any  dispute  concerning  the  infallibility  and  supremacy  of 
the  Pope.  This  principle  prevailing,  the  question  of  the  Pope's 
supremacy  is  not  wrorth  a  straw.  To  think  of  putting  down 
Popery  by  arguing  against  transubstantiation,  the  papal  suprem- 
acy, and  things  of  that  sort,  is  as  idle  as  to  think  of  dipping  the 
river  dry  without  ascending  to  its  springs.  The  Reformation 


APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION. 

was  more  radical  than  this  ;  it  took  its  stand  upon  the  great  doc- 
trine of  justification  by  faith  alone,  in  opposition  to  justification 
by  priestly  offices  and  interventions  ;  and  to  this  basis  the  contro- 
versy is  destined  to  descend  once  more. 

But  let  us  apply  to  this  dogma  of  succession  a  further  test ; 
not  so  much  to  try  the  principle,  as  to  examine  the  proof  of  the 
succession  as  a  matter  of  fact,  whether  the  doctrine  can  in  any 
sense  become  an  article  of  faith. 

A  sinner  inquires,  What  must  I  do  to  be  saved  ?  We  (I  mean 
we  "  Dissenters,"  Presbyterians,  Baptists,  Methodists,  Congrega- 
tionalists,  and  the  whole  Protestant  world  save  the  Prelatists) 
say  to  him,  The  matter  lies  wholly  between  your  own  soul  and 
your  God.  "  No  outward  form  can  make  you  clean."  No 
earthly  Priest  can  do  you  good. 

"  Behold  I  fall  before  thy  face, 
My  only  refuge  is  thy  grace  ; 
No  outward  forms  can  make  me  clean, 
The  leprosy  lies  deep  within. 

"  No  bleeding  bird,  nor  bleeding  beast, 
Nor  hyssop  branch,  nor  sprinkling  priest, 
Nor  running  brook,  nor  flood,  nor  sea, 
Can  wash  the  dismal  stain  away." 

If  you  had  the  Apostles  here  themselves,  instead  of  their  pre- 
tended official  successors,  they  could  do  you  no  good.  You  must 
"  BELIEVE  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ;"  that  is,  with  a  penitent  and 
broken  heart,  despairing  of  all  other  help,  commit  your  soul  to  the 
efficacy  of  Christ's  atoning  blood,  as  set  forth  in  the  provisions 
and  promises  of  the  Gospel.  "  With  the  heart  man  believeth  unto 
righ  teousness." 

If  that  man  so  believes,  and  is  baptized,  and  keeps  Christ's 
ordinances  with  any  portion  of  the  people  of  God,  we  do  not 
suppose  it  will  ever  be  inquired  what  was  the  pedigree  of  his 
minister,  or  whether  it  was  done  in  a  Baptist,  Methodist,  Episco- 
pal, Presbyterian,  or  other  church.  We  have  our  preferences ; 
we  think  that  some  of  these,  in  unessential  respects,  are  laboring 
under  errors  ;  and  they  think  so  of  us.  We  leave  every  man  in 
these  respects  to  be  fully  persuaded  in  his  own  mind.  To  his 
own  master  he  standeth  or  falleth.  But  salvation  is  not  depen- 
dent on  Church  folds,  or  denominational  peculiarities.  We  sup- 
pose that  one,  laboring  under  the  error  of  rejecting  all  outward 
sacraments,  and  all  official  ministers  (e.  g.,  like  the  Quakers), 
will  not  be  rejected  from  salvation,  provided  he  holds  the  head, 
i.  e.,  that  he  has  penitently  and  obediently  embraced  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  sincerely  endeavors  to  keep  his  command- 
ments. 


378  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

We  therefore  point  the  anxious  inquirer  directly  to  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  to  him  ALONE.  We  do  not  hesitate  to  adopt 
the  language  of  Paul ;  "  The  righteousness  which  is  of  faith 
speaketh  on  this  wise ;  say  not  in  thine  heart,  who  shall  ascend 
into  heaven  (that  is,  to  bring  down  Christ  from  above);  or  who 
shall  descend  into  the  deep  ?  (that  is,  to  bring  up  Christ  again 
from  the  dead.) — But  what  saith  it  ?  The  word  is  nigh  thee,  even 
in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart;  that  is  the  word  of  faith  which 
we  preach  ;  That  if  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the  Lord 
Jesus,  and  shalt  believe  in  thine  heart  that  God  hath  raised  him 
from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved." 

No,  says  the  Prelatist;  something  more  than  this  is  requisite. 
"  Communion  with  the  priesthood  of  the  Apostolic  succession 
is  the  indispensable  condition  of  salvation."  If  saved  without 
this,  it  must  be  only  as  the  heathen  may  be  saved,  by  the  un- 
known, unrevealed,  uncovenanted  mercies  of  God.  The  Gospel 
affords  you  no  promise  of  salvation  without  your  coming  under 
the  hands  of  a  priest  of  the  true  Apostolical  succession. 

Be  it  so.  Yes,  be  it  so.  The  anxious  inquirer  concludes  to 
take  that  way  to  salvation,  and  INQUIRES  FOR  THE  TABLES  OF 

THE    GENEALOGIES. 

Where  are  they  ?  he  inquires.     In  the  Bible  ? 

Oh  no  ;  God  has.  not  revealed  those  tables,  nor  has  inspira- 
tion kept  the  record. 

Not  in  the  Bible !  Why,  really  it  seems  strange  that  God 
has  revealed  so  much  truth,  and  yet  left  out  the  truth  of  all  truth, 
the  one  which  I  want  most,  and  on  which  my  salvation  abso- 
lutely depends ;  at  least  on  which  it  depends  so  far  as  the  Gos- 
pel can  be  of  any  use  to  me  at  all!  Not  in  the  Bible?  Why, 
faith  embraces  truth  on  ihe  authority  of  God;  and  here  it  seems 
I  am  to  rest  my  faith  on  something  without  the  authority  of 
God.  Not  revealed  that  table  of  genealogies?  How  then  is  it 
possible  for  me  to  KNOW  what  I  must  do  to  be  saved? 

Oh  no,  anxious  sinner,  you  must  trust  the  CHURCH. 

What,  your  Protestant  Church,  that  does  not  even  pretend  to 
be  infallible?  A  Church  which,  while  it  pretends  to  be  Catholic, 
is  absolutely  rejected  by  the  immense  majority  of  the  Catholic 
world  ?  Well,  be  it  so,  since  there  is  no  remedy  ;  but  tell  me  ; 
has  your  Church  kept  the  record  ?  And  has  she,  on  her  authori- 
ty, ever  set  that  record  forth  as  infallible  and  true  ?  Show  me,  at 
least,  the  authentic  record  of  her  action  in  this  case  ;  that  I  may 
know  that  it  is  the  Church  that  I  trust,  and  not  something  set 
forth  by  somebody,  without  any  authority  of  hers. 

In  consistency  with  his  principles,  the  priest  ought  to  say  :  As 
to  these  matters,  anxious  inquirer,  the  Church  has  never  kept  the 
record ;  the  Church  has  never,  by  any  act,  set  the  record  forth, 


APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION. 


379 


or  authoritatively  vouched  for  it.  But  then  it  runs  pretty  tolera- 
bly fair,  through  a  tolerably  fair  tradition ;  howbeit,  in  some  of 
the  links,  we  confess,  there  are  some  discrepancies  among  dif- 
ferent authors.  But  learned  men  have,  with  great  research  and 
pains,  made  out  as  accurate  lists  as  may  be ;  and  the  Church, — 
yes,  the  Church  may  be  considered  as  having  received  them  by 
a  sort  of  tacit  consent.  You  may  therefore  rely  upon  it;  yes  you 
may  rely  upon  it ;  for  although,  if  the  Church  had  actually  set 
forth  those  lists  she  might  have  erred ;  yet  you  may  consider 
her  general  tradition  (i.  e.,  not  her  tradition,  but  the  tradition 
generally  received  among  her  members),  you  may  consider  this 
tradition,  in  a  sort,  infallible,  and  fearlessly  venture  your  soul 
upon  it.  Howbeit,  should  a  link  happen  to  fail,  you  are  gone, 
like  a  heathen,  to  the  uncovenanted  mercies  of  God.  We  can, 
however,  give  you  nothing  more  certain  than  this  ;  it  is  the  best 
the  Church  can  do  in  the  case. 

Well,  so  be  it,  responds  the  inquiring  sinner  ;  but  this  seems 
a  strange  sort  of  faith,  believing  on  no  revelation  or  warrant 
of  God;  no,  nor  yet  on  any  warrant  of  the  Church,  which,  even 
if  she  should  warrant,  is  not  infallible,  nor  able  to  make  good 
her  guaranty  ;  and  believing  this  on  a  tradition,  I  have  not  even 
the  sober  action  of  the  Church  that  it  is  her  tradition  at  all.  But 
so  it  must  be  ;  give  me  the  lists  of  the  succession ;  the  table  of 
"  genealogies ;"  show  me  this  spiritual  pedigree  on  which  I 
must  hang  the  salvation  of  my  soul. 

Do  I  seem  to  trifle  ?  The  trifling  is  not  mine.  I  have  done 
no  more  than  to  state  in  plain  language,  the  doctrine  of  Apos- 
tolical succession  in  its  application ;  a  doctrine  on  which  I 
am  told  to  my  face,  that  I  am  no  minister  of  Christ,  but  an  in- 
terloper, a  usurper,  a  son  of  Korah  ;  and  that  the  Church  to 
which  I  minister  is  no  Church,  but  an  assembly  of  rebels  and 
schismatics;  who  in  all  their  pretended  sacraments  wickedly 
profane  the  ordinances  of  God.  I  have  not  trifled ;  I  have  in- 
deed stated  in  plain  language  a  doctrine  which  needs  only  to  be 
stated  in  plain  language,  to  appear  ridiculously  absurd.  If  the 
carcase  is  so  monstrous  when  the  cloak  is  off,  blame  the  monster, 
not  him  who  uncovers  it. 

Let  us,  however,  proceed,  for  these  absurdities  are  not  fully 
exposed. 

The  anxious  inquirer  takes  the  list ;  and  since  it  is  not  in  the 
Bible,  and  since  the  Church  does  not  see  fit  to  vouch  for  it,  he 
takes  Chapin;  and  longing  to  find  a  ground  on  which  he  may 
rest  as  the  warrant  of  his  salvation,  he  opens  at  p.  347,  and  reads, 
as  his  eye  glances  along  the  list  of  the  genealogy,  thus : 


380  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

"  LlNUS, 

ANACLETUS, 
CLEMENT, 
EVARISTUS, 
ALEXANDER, 
ZEPHRYNUS, 
PONTIANUS, 

DlONYSIUS, 

CAIUS, 

MlLTIADES, 

DAMASUS  L, 
ZOSINUS, 
GELASIUS, 
HORMISDAS, 

PELAGIUS  L," 

and  so  on,  till  that  single  line  has  swelled  to  eight  pages  (which 
of  course  we  have  not  room  here  to  repeat).  This  is  the  list 
through  which  the  present  American  Bishops  derive  their  paternity 
from  Rome. 

The  inquirer  now  opens  again  at  p.  325,  and  reads  such  names 
as  these : 

"JAMES  ALPHEUS, 
SIMEON, 
JUSTUS  L, 
TOBIAS, 
VALENS, 

DOLCHIANUS, 
Dius, 

MAZABANES, 
ZAMBDAS, 

HERENIUS,V 
and  so  on. 

He  turns  again  to  p.  326,  to  the  list  once  so  essential  to  the 
salvation  of  all  who  lived  in  Wales  : 
"  DAVID, 
ELIUD, 
KENEVA, 

MORV-EL, 

HAERNURIER, 
ELVAETH, 
GURNEL, 

GORNWIST, 
GORWAN, 

CLENDAKE, 
EYNYAEN, 

ELUDGAETH," 
and  so  on. 


APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION.  381 


He  opens  again  at  p.  331,  to  the  names,  without  which  salva- 
tion was  unable  to  flow  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  Diocese  of 
York: 

"  PAULINUS, 

VACANCY  20  YEARS, 
CEDD, 

WILFRID  L, 
BOSA, 

ST.  JOHN  OF  BEVERLY, 
EANBALD, 
WULSIUS, 

WlMUNDUS, 

ETHELBALD, 

ALFRIC  PUTTOCK." 

Here  then  are  the  lists ;  certain ;  infallibly  certain,  say  some 
of  the  Prelatists ;  and  so  they  should  be,  since  the  salvation  of 
the  world  depends  so  largely  upon  them.  • 

But  suppose  that  one  (i.  e.  that  I  myself)  should,  in  all  sin- 
cerity and  earnestness,  wish  to  know  if  I  may  hang  my  hopes 
of  salvation  upon  the  strength  of  this  pedigree.  I  begin  to 
inquire.  I  would  not,  surely,  suspend  myself  over  a  bottomless 
gulf  upon  an  old  rope,  or  rusty  chain,  without  seeing  how  it  is 
fastened,  and  what  is  the  condition  of  the  links.  I  begin  to  look 
into  this  matter. 

I  see  that  according  to  Dr.  Hook,  our  Episcopal  Priests  can 
trace  their  pedigree  up  to  Peter  at  Rome,  or  up  to  Paul  through 
the  old  line  of  British  Bishops.  But  was  Peter  ever  at  Rome  ? 
Is  it  certain  that  Paul  ordained  any  of  the  old  Bishops  in  Britain? 
How  is  the  chain  fastened  ?  The  most  learned  men  who  have 
pushed  their  inquiries  in  that  direction,  deny  that  Peter  was  ever 
at  Rome ;  others  acknowledge  that  it  is  improbable ;  and  the 
proof  is  absolutely  wanting.  Here  the  chain  hangs  upon  an  old 
rotten  peg-  of  a  doubtful  and  improbable  tradition.  It  is  also  a 
matter  of  doubt,  and  very  improbable,  that  Paul  ever  was  in 
Britain.  The  proof  is  absolutely  wanting.  The  fastening-  here 
is  so  uncertain  that  a  prudent  man  would  not  risk  a  farthing 
on  it. 

But  waive  the  fastening" :  come  to  the  SUCCESSION.  "  Come 
we  to  Rome,"  says  Stillingfleet,  "and  here  the  succession  is  as 
muddy  as  the  Tiber;  for  here  Tertullian,  Ruffinus,  and  several 
others,  place  CLEMENT  next  to  Peter :  Irenaeus  and  Eusebius  set 
ANACLETUS  before  him.  Epiphanius  and  Ophtatus  make  both 
ANACLETUS,  and  CLETUS,  and  LINUS,  to  precede  him.  What  way 
shall  we  find  to  extricate  ourselves  out  of  this  labyrinth  ?" 

Bishop  Jewell  says,  "  But,  wherefore,  telleth  us  M.  Harding 
[the  Jesuit],  this  long  tale  of  succession  ?  Have  these  men  their 


382  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


own  succession  in  so  safe  record  ?  Who  then  was  Bishop  of 
Rome,  next  by  succession  unto  Peter  ?  Who  was  the  second  ? 
Who  the  third  ?  Who  the  fourth  ?  Irenaeus  reckoneth  them 
together  in  this  order,  thus:  Peter,  Linus,  Cletus,  Clemens. 
Ophtatus,  thus :  Petrus,  Linus,  Clemens,  Anacletus.  Clemens 
says  that  he  himself  was  next  to  Peter."  [Chapin  says  Linus 
was.]  "  Hereby  it  is  clear,"  continues  Bishop  Jewell,  "  that  of 
the  four  first  Bishops  of  Rome,  M.  Harding  cannot  certainly  tell 
who  in  order  succeeded  each  other." 

Stillingfleet  shows  that  with  regard  to  what  was  done  in  most 
countries,  after  the  Apostles,  there  are  no  authentic  records. 
"  But,"  he  says,  "instead  of  this,  we  have  a  general  silence  of 
antiquity,  and  nothing  but  the  forgeries  of  later  ages  to  supply 
the  vacuity  ;  whereby  they  fill  up  the  empty  places,  as  Plutarch 
expresses  it,  as  geographers  do  maps,  with  some  fabulous  crea- 
tures of  their  own."  "  For  who  dare  with  confidence  believe  the 
conjectures  of  Eusebius,  at  three  hundred  years'  distance  from 
Apostolic  times,  when  he  hath  no  other  testimony  to  vouch,  but 
the  hypothesis  of  an  uncertain  Clement  (certainly  not  he  of  Al- 
exandria, if  Jos.  Scaliger  may  be  credited),  and  the  commenta- 
ries of  Hegesippus,  whose  relations  and  authority  are  as  ques- 
tionable as  many  of  the  reports  of  Eusebius  himself  are,  in  refer- 
ence to  those  elder  times ;  for  which  I  need  no  other  testimony 
but  Eusebius,  in  a  place  enough  of  itself  to  blast  the  whole  credit 
of  antiquity  as  to  the  matter  now  in  debate.  For  speaking  of  Paul 
and  Peter,  and  the  Churches  by  them  planted,  and  coming  to 
inquire  after  their  successors,  he  makes  this  very  ingenuous  con- 
fession. "  There  being  so  many  of  them,  and  some  of  them 
naturally  rivals,  it  is  not  easy  to  say  which  of  them  were  account- 
ed eligible  to  govern  the  Churches  established,  unless  it  be  those 
that  we  may  select  out  of  the  writings  of  Paul  ?"  Such  is  the 
testimony  of  Eusebius. 

Here  we  have  it;  these  lists  of  genealogies  rest  mainly  upon 
the  credit  of  Eusebius ;  and  Eusebius  confesses  that,  beyond 
the  New  Testament,  there  is  no  manner  of  certainty. 

But  hear  the  remarks  of  Stillingfleet  upon  this  confession  of 
Eusebius  : — "  Say  you  so  ?  Is  it  so  hard  a  matter  to  find  out  who 
succeeded  the  Apostles  in  the  Churches  planted  by  them,  un- 
less it  be  those  mentioned  by  Paul?  What  then  becomes  of  our 
unquestionable  line  of  succession  of  the  Bishops  of  several 
churches,  and  the  large  diagrams  made  of  the  Apostolical 
Churches,  with  every  one's  name  set  down  in  his  order,  as  though 
the  writer  had  been  Clarenceaulx"  [king  at  arms]  "  to  the  Apos- 
tles themselves?  Is  it  come  to  this,  that  we  have  nothing  cer- 
tain but  what  is  in  Scripture  ?  And  must  then  the  tradition  of 
the  Church  be  our  rule  to  interpret  Scripture  by  ?  An  excellent 


APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION.  383 

way  to  find  out  the  truth  doubtless,  to  bend  the  rule  to  the  crook- 
ed stick  ;  and  to  make  the  judge  stand  to  the  opinion  of  his  lac- 
quey, what  sentence  he  shall  pass  upon  the  cause  in  question ; 
to  make  Scripture  stand  cap  in  hand  to  tradition,  to  show  whe- 
ther it  may  have  leave  to  speak  or  not!  Are  all  the  great  outcries 
of  Apostolical  tradition,  of  personal  succession,  of  unquestiona- 
ble records,  resolved  at  last  into  the  Scripture  itself,  by  him  from 
whom  all  these  long  pedigrees  are  fetched  ?  Then  let  succession 
know  its  place,  and  learn  to  vail  bonnet  to  the  Scriptures.  And 
withal,  let  men  take  heed  of  overreaching  themselves,  when  they 
would  bring  down  so  large  a  catalogue  of  Bishops  from  the  first 
and  purest  times  of  the  Church ;  for  it  will  be  found  hard  for 
others  to  believe  them,  when  Eusebius  professeth  it  so  hard  to 
find  them.  Well  might  Scaliger  then  complain,  that  the  inter- 
val from  the  last  Chapter  of  Acts,  to  the  middle  of  Trajan,  was 
"  a  mere  chaos  filled  up  with  the  rude  conceptions  of  Papias, 
Hermas,  and  others,  who,  like  Hannibal,  when  they  could  not 
find  a  way  through,  would  make  one  by  force  or  fraud." 

So  much  for  the  tables  of  the  genealogies.  The  accounts 
are  contradictory  and  fabulous.  Eusebius,  on  whose  authority 
they  chiefly  rest,  declares  that  there  is  no  certainty  about  any  of 
them,  beyond  the  record  of  the  New  Testament. 

The  anxious  inquirer  now  wishes  to  know  what  he  must  do 
to  be  saved.  Instead  of  going  to  the  Bible  alone  for  instruc- 
tion, and  to  Christ,  alone  and  directly,  for  help,  he  is  told  to 
make  it  his  " supreme  care"  to  look  for  a  priest  who  can  help 
him  by  valid  and  authorized  "  priestly  intervention ;" — that 
"  Christ  is  the  way  to  the  Father,  and  there  is  no  way  to  Christ, 
save  by  the  Church ;  and  no  Church  without  a  Bishop  of  the 
Apostolical  succession,"  so  that  "  The  Bishop  alone  can  unite 
him  to  the  Father."  Sure  enough,  if  this  be  true,  the  pedigree 
of  his  priest  must  be  his  "  supreme  care." 

Instead  of  the  Bible  ^  therefore,  which  gives  him  no  light  on 
this  most  important  of  all  questions,  he  takes  up  Perceval  or 
9hapin^  or  some  list  of  the  succession  given  in  a  tract  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Tract  Society  :  He  opens  and  reads : 

u  CEDD,  WILIFRED  L,  BOSA, — EANBALP,  WULSIUS,  WIMEN- 
DUS  ;" — shall  the  dying  sinner  hang  his  salvation  on  this  chain  of 
the  succession?  Had  there  been  no  blacksmith,  St.  Dunstan, 
to  pull  the  devil's  nose  with  his  hot  pincers ; — must  the  whole 
of  Old  England — though  ever  so  full  of  the  Gospel — have  gone 
to  remediless  perdition  ?  But  the  genealogy  ; — is  one  Christian, 
in  half  a  million,  capable  of  examining  this  list  ?  Tell  me, 
plain  Churchman — what  do  you  know  about  "  OSKILEL,  ALFRIC, 

PUTTOCK,  KlNSIUS,  R^DWARDUS,  BLEITHENEL,  SuLGHEIN,  RvTH- 

MARCH,  GALFRID,  or  JORWITH  ?  Take  any  one  of  these  and  prove 


384  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

to  me  that  such  a  man  ever  had  any  existence ; — that  he  ever 
received  the  Apostolical  succession  ; — that  he  ever  transmitted  it. 
Go  to  any  one  of  the  members  of  our  neighboring  St.  Paul's, 
who  glory  in  nothing  so  much  as  in  the  succession,  whereby 
they  are  "  the  Church  ;"  and  ask  him  to  prove,  concerning  any 
one  of  these,  or  any  one  of  a  hundred  other  links,  that  there  was 
such  a  man;  that  he  regularly  received  the  succession;  that  he 
regularly  transmitted  it ;  and  I  hazard  nothing  in  saying  not  one 
of  these  can  do  it.  You  may  go  to  the  Rector,  or  to  the  Bishop, 
and  ten  thousand  to  one,  that  neither  can  tell  you,  off  hand,  any- 
thing about  these  men ;  nor  perhaps,  should  I  enumerate  a  dozen 
names  as  uncouth  as  these,  could  they  tell  whether  any  one  of 
that  dozen  other  names  is  in  the  list  or  not.  And  I  Affirm,  with- 
out hesitation,  let  them  examine  as  much  as  they  please,  there  is 
no  manner  of  certainty  to  be  attained.  Dr.  Prideaux  declares 
that  with  regard  to  what  persons  filled  such  or  such  links  in  the 
upper  end  of  the  chain,  "  it  is  a  very  doubtful  question  ;"  and 
that  there  is  "  no  certainty  to  be  had"  Calamy  declares  that 
"  the  head  of  the  Nile  is  not  more  obscure  "  than  the  first  part  of 
these  tables.  And  when  you  come  down  five  or  six  hundred 
years,  and  take  only  the  pretended  succession  in  Britain,  Stilling- 
fleet  declares,  "  As  to  the  British  Churches," — "  from  the  loss  of 
ancient  records  we  cannot  draw  down  the  succession  of  Bishops 
from  the  Apostolic  times." 

Besides  this,  there  are  lines  where  they  can  be  traced  branch- 
ing off  like  a  river  in  a  swamp,  running  and  meandering  diverse 
ways,  agreeing  in  nothing  save  in  nourishing  venomous  mon- 
sters and  reptiles : — There  are  lines  of  succession  each  claiming 
the  entire  ground,  and  each  denouncing  and  anathematizing  the 
other.  With  regard  to  those  divided  and  dubious  parts  of  the 
Roman  succession,  Baronius  himself,  the  great  Romish  historian 
says  that  "  for  fifty  years  together  there  was  not  one  pious  man." 

*  *  "  O  what  was  then  the  face  of  the  holy  Roman  Church  ! 
How  filthy,  when  the  vilest  and  most  powerful  harlots  ruled  in 
the  court  of  Rome  !  by  whose  arbitrary  sway  Dioceses  were 
made  and  unmade ;  Bishops  were  consecrated,  and  (which  is  in- 
expressibly horrible)  false  Popes,  by  their  paramours,  were  thrust 
into  the  chair  of  St.  Peter."  *  *  "In  those  elections  no 
mention  is  made  of  the  acts  of  the  clergy,  either  by  choosing 
the  Pope  at  the  time  of  his  election,  or  of  their  consent  afterward. 
All  the  canons  were  suppressed  into  silence  ;  the  ancient  tradi- 
tions were  proscribed  ;  the  customs  formerly  practised  in  electing 
the  Pope,  with  the  sacred  rites  and  pristine  usages,  were  all  ex- 
tinguished. In  this  manner,  lust,  supported  by  secular  power, 
excited  to  frenzy  in  the  rage  for  nomination,  ruled  all  things. 

Now  observe  what  the  anxious  inquirer  is  obliged,  in  the  out- 


APOSTOLICAL    SUCCESSION.  385 

set,  to  believe  as  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  his  creed.  FIRST, 
he  must  believe,  that  all  these  monsters  of  lust  and  butchery, 
these  infidels  and  atheists,  were  true  APOSTLES  OF  JESUS  CHRIST  ; 
that  they  had  power  not  only  to  confer  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  that 
they  had  the  entire  monopoly  of  all  the  covenanted  mercies  of 
God;  so  that  the  poor  witnesses,  who  perished  in  the  dungeons 
of  the  Inquisition,  or  were  burned  by  this  true  line  of  the  suc- 
cession, were  probably  lost  as  rebels  and  followers  of  Korah. 
SECONDLY,  he  must  believe  that  through  these  turbid  and  filthy 
waters  the  stream  of  succession  ran  canonically  and  pure  ;  that, 
in  spite  of  these  disorders,  the  Apostolic  office  was  regularly  and 
infallibly  transmitted  ;  and,  THIRDLY,  that  no  name  in  the  list 
is  either  fabulous  or  doubtful,  but  certain  and  true  as  the  ever- 
lasting throne. 

All  this  he  must  believe  with  a  strong  faith  ;  for  if  Christ  was 
not  constantly  with  that  succession  of  monsters ;  if  the  Apostolical 
virtue  and  office  did  not  run  uncontaminated  through  the  filthy 
waters  ;  if  a  name  in  the  whole  list  be  either  fabulous  or  doubt- 
ful, the  inquirer  can  have  no  secure  ground  of  salvation.  He 
must  hang  the  destiny  of  his  soul  on  this  chain,  and  hold  to 
these  articles  of  belief  with  an  unwavering  faith,  or  he  cannot  be 
a  "  sound  Churchman" — he  can  have  no  security  that  he  shall 
ever  be  saved. 

But  the  inquirer  is  told  that  he  need  not  examine  these  matters; 
that  THE  CHURCH  is  his  security  for  all  this.  I  beg  pardon  ;  "  all 
this''  must  be  his  security  for  the  Church.  Without  a  Church, 
and  before  he  can  receive  the  witness  of  anything  that  claims  to 
be  a  Church,  he  must  first  test  those  claims  by  these  doctrines. 
He  must  believe  these  doctrines  before  he  can  believe  that  any- 
thing- is  a  Church ;  he  must  prove  the  Church  by  all  this  before 
he  can  receive  her  testimony. 

But  as  to  receiving  this  list  on  the  authority  of  the  Church  ;— • 
who  speaks  for  the  Church  ?  She  has  not  spoken  on  the  subject, 
and  we  have  already  seen  that  we  must,  on  the  Prelatical  scheme, 
receive  these  lists  before  we  can  ascertain  who  has  a  right  to 
speak,  either  as  the  Church,  or  on  her  behalf.  Who  is  the 
Church?  Where  does  she  speak?  Nothing  that  claims  to  be 
the  Church  has  ever  spoken,  in  her  own  name,  on  these  points. 
If  so,  show  us  where;  when;  by  what  council,  either  of  the 
world,  of  a  nation,  or  even  of  a  Diocese.  True  it  is  that  many 
individuals^  who  pretend  to  be  OF  the  Church,  gravely  tell  us 
that  the  list  is  absolutely  certain ;  and  as  many  more,  acknow- 
ledged to  be  OF  the  Church,  tell  us  that  the  whole  lists  are  not 
worth  a  straw.  Who  speaks  for  the  Church  ?  Whv,  even  on 
this  ground,  the  testimony  of  the  Church  is  as  traditional,  as  un- 
certain, and  as  contradictory,  as  the  very  lists  of  the  succession 
25 


386 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 


to  which  she  is  called  to  bear  witness.  And  were  it  true  that  the 
Church  had  spoken,  and  that  too  the  whole  Church;  and  that 
she  had  spoken  unanimously,  and  authoritatively ;  I  do  not 
know  that  the  Church  is  infallible  any  more  than  the  Pope. 
Nothing  is  certain  but  God's  word,  and  that  is  a  rock.  I  re- 
fuse to  build  my  salvation  on  the  ground  of  any  mere  human 
testimony. 

Baronius  shows  again,  that  for  fifty  or  eighty  years  together, 
there  have  besn  two  or  three  popes  at  the  same  time ;  one  of  them 
denying  to  the  other  the  very  name  of  Christian,  reproaching  each 
other  with  the  appellation  of  heretic  and  anti- Christ,  and  each 
pronouncing  the  other  an  unlawful  Pope ;  that  one  cut  off  two 
of  the  fingers  of  his  predecessor  ;  dug  up  the  bodies  of  others 
from  their  graves,  and  having  insulted  their  ashes,  ordered 
their  bodies  to  be  cast  into  the  Tiber;  that  sometimes  all  the 
three  popes  together  were  condemned  and  degraded  by  a  gene- 
ral council  as  false  popes,  heretics,  ungodly  wretches,  not  even  to 
be  reckoned  in  the  number  of  Christians  ;  and  that  nevertheless 
many  of  the  Bishops  and  clergy  were  ordained  by  the  false 
popes.  Did  the  current  nevertheless  run  pure  through  all  these  ? 

I  am  aware  that  many  Churchmen,  not  relishing  the  idea 
of  drawing  their  life-blood  from  the  paps  of  what  the  reformers  call 
such  "  a  foul,  filtlry,  withered  old  harlot,"  endeavor  to  avoid  that 
channel,  and  to  trace  the  succession  in  Britain  directly  up  to  the 
Apostles.  This  is  all  idle  and  impossible.  No  mortal  can  tell 
who  first  preached  the  Gospel  in  Britain.  No  one  can  prove 
that  either  of  the  two  pretended  heads,  Peter  and  Paul,  was 
ever  on  the  island.  No  one  can  trace  the  early  list  of  names. 
If  there  were  ever  any  records,  they  have  all  perished  ;  and  were 
they  not  so,  the  Roman  flood  came  in  and  swept  over  the  land, 
overturning  and  commingling  everything.  The  only  pretence 
that  can  possibly  be  made  is,  that  peradventure  some  Homoeopathic 
drop  of  the  old  succession  may  be  mingled  somewhere  in  this 
turbid  flood. 

But  the  plea  is  otherwise  all  idle  ;  since  they  who  make  it,  are 
after  all  compelled  to  admit  that  the  Romish  succession  is  good, 
or  else  to  claim  that  the  Anglican  and  the  American  Episcopal 
Churches  compose  the  entire  Catholic  Church,  and  are  the  only 
parts  of  the  true  Church  in.  the  whole  world.  And  if  it  be  once 
admitted  that  blood,  and  murder,  and  levvdness,  and  atheism, 
and  all  manner  of  irregularity  and  false  doctrine,  can  taint  the 
succession,  then  no  one  can  be  sure  that  the  succession  is  not 
entirely  lost. 

"  Who  can  undertake,"  says  Archbishop  Whately,  "to  pro- 
mise that  during  that  long  period  usually  designated  as  the 
dark  ages,  no  such  taint  was  ever  introduced  ?  Irregularities 


APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION.  387 

could  not  have  been  wholly  excluded  without  a  perpetual 
miracle  ;  and  that  no  such  miraculous  interference  existed,  we 
have  even  historical  proof.  Amidst  the  numerous  corruptions 
of  doctrine  and  of  practice,  and  gross  superstitions  that  crept 
in  during  those  ages,  we  find  recorded  descriptions,  not  only 
of  the  profound  ignorance  and  profligacy  of  life  of  many  of 
the  clergy  ;  but  also  of  the  greatest  irregularities  in  respect  of 
discipline  and  form.  We  read  of  Bishops  consecrated  when 
mere  children;  of  men  officiating,  who  barely  knew  their 
letters  ;  of  Prelates  expelled,  and  others  put  in  their  places 
by  violence ;  of  illiterate  drunkards,  and  profligate  laymen 
admitted  to  holy  orders;  and  in  short,  of  the  prevalence 
of  every  kind  of  disorder  and  reckless  disregard  of  the  decency 
which  the  Apostle  enjoins.  It  is  inconceivable  that  any  one, 
even  moderately  acquainted  with  history,  can  feel  a  certainty,  or 
any  approach  to  certainty,  that  amidst  all  this  confusion  and  cor- 
ruption, every  requisite  form  was  in  every  instance  strictly  ad- 
hered to  by  men,  many  of  them  operily  profane  and  secular,  un- 
restrained by  public  opinion  through  the  gross  ignorance  of 
the  population  among  which  they  lived,  and  that  no  one  not 
duly  consecrated  or  ordained  was  admitted  to  sacred  offi- 
ces."— "Even  in  the  memory  of  persons  now  living,  there 
existed  a  Bishop  concerning  whom  there  was  so  much  of 
mystery  and  uncertainty  prevailing  as  to  when,  and  where,  and 
by  whom,  he  had  been  ordained,  that  doubts  existed  in  the  minds 
of  many  persons  whether  he  had  ever  been  ordained  at  all." — 
"  The  ultimate  consequence  must  be,  that  any  one  who  sincerely 
believes  that  his  claim  to  the  benefits  of  the  Gospel  covenant 
depends  on  his  own  minister's  claim  to  the  supposed  sacramental 
virtue  of  true  ordination  ;  and  this  again  on  perfect  Apostolical 
succession  ;  must  be  involved,  in  proportion  as  he  reads  and  in- 
quires, and  reflects,  and  reasons  on  the  subject,  in  the  most  dis- 
tressing doubt  and  perplexity."  "  It  is  no  wonder,  therefore,  that 
the  advocates  of  this  theory  studiously  disparage  reasoning,  and 
deprecate  all  exercise  of  the  mind  in  reflection  ;  decry  all  appeals 
to  evidences,  and  lament  that  even  the  power  of  reading  should 
be  imparted  to  the  people.  It  is  not  without  cause,  that  they 
dread  and  lament  an  '  age  of  too  much  light,'  and  wish  to  in- 
volve religion  in  *  a  solemn  and  awful  gloom.'  It  is  not  with- 
out cause,  that  having  removed  the  Christian's  confidence  from 
a  rock,  to  base  it  on  sand,  they  forbid  all  prying  curiosity  to  ex- 
amine its  foundation." 

Chillingworth  takes  the  same  view.  "  In  fine,  to  know  this 
one  thing  (viz.  that  such  or  such  a  man  is  a  Priest),  you  must 
first  know  ten  thousand  others,  whereof,  not  any  one  can  be 
known."  *  *  u  He  that  shall  put  them  together,  and  maturely 


388  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

consider  all  the  possible  ways  of  lapsing  and  nullifying  such  a 
priesthood,  will  be  inclinable  to  think  that  it  is  a  hundred  to  one, 
that  amongst  a  hundred  seeming  Priests,  there  is  not  one  true 
one." 

Archbishop  Whately  roundly  declares,  that  on  this  dogma  of 
succession,  "  there  is  not  a  minister  in  all  Christendom  who  is 
able  to  trace  up,  with  any  approach  to  certainty,  his  own  spiritual 
pedigree." 

The  present  English  Bishop  of  Hereford  says,  in  a  charge 
to  his  clergy,  u  You  will  exceed  all  just  bounds,  if  you  are  con- 
stantly insisting  upon  the  necessity  of  a  belief  in,  and  a  certainty 
of,  the  Apostolical  succession  in  the  Bishops  of  our  Church,  as 
the  only  security  for  the  efficacy  of  the  sacraments." — "  To  spread 
abroad  this  notion,  would  be  to  make  ourselves  the  derision  of  the 
world." 

We  may  now  demand  what  possible  security  can  any  High 
Church  Prelatist.  have,  on  his  own  grounds,  that  he  can  be  saved 
by  any  provision  or  promu{$  of  the  Gospel  ?  He  must  believe 
in  God's  Word ;  he  must  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  But 
it  is  more  important  that  he  believe,  that  his  Priest  derives  a 
sacerdotal  virtue  by  a  personal  succession  from  the  Apostles. 
Does  God's  Word  tell  him  anything  of  this  succession  ?  Not  a 
syllable.  Does  any  authentic  record,  divine  or  human,  assure 
him  that  the  pretended  list  of  the  succession  is  true  ?  There  is 
no  such  record.  Can  he  trace  out  the  lists  and  satisfy  himself, 
by  substantial  evidence,  with  regard  to  even  half  of  the  particular 
names  in  those  lists,  that  they  are  names  of  persons  who  regularly 
received  and  transmitted  the  Apostolical  virtue  ?  No  man  living 
can  do  it.  The  earliest,  and  most  competent  uninspired  histo- 
rian of  the  early  times  of  Christianity,  confessed  that  it  could  not 
be  done  with  any  certainty. 

What  then  is  the  belief  of  the  jure  divino  Prelatist  ?  It  is  not 
FAITH  ;  for  faith  must  rest  upon  the  Word  of  God.  It  is  not 
REASON  ;  for  reason  bases  her  conclusions  on  evidence;  of  which 
there  is,  in  this  case,  an  utter  deficiency.  The  belief  of  the  High 
Church  Prelatist,  and  of  every  one  who,  like  Bishop  Brownell, 
builds  anything  upon  this  Apostolical  succession  in  the  Order  of 
Diocesan  Bishops,  is  A  PALTRY  SUPERSTITION;  a  mere  dogged 
credulity ;  the  raving  of  bigotry  and  fanaticism ;  for  after  all  that 
is  said  of  fanaticism,  there  is  no  fanaticism  on  earth  more  wild 
and  baseless,  than  that  of  a  man  who  coolly  pretends  to  have  re- 
ceived the  Apostolic  office,  with  power  to  confer  the  Holy  Ghost; 
to  "  transfer "  men  by  virtue  of  his  priestly  prerogatives  and 
efficacious  administration  of  sacraments,  "out  of  the  kingdom 
of  Satan  into  the  kingdom  of  God."  I  speak  soberly,  when  I 
declare  my  conviction,  that  the  Papist,  when  he  blindly  believes 


APOSTOLICAL  SUCCESSION. 

that  hi-<  Priest,  by  virtue  of  transubstantiation,  can  create  the  body 
and  blood  of  his  Saviour,  and  give  it  whole  and  enlire  to  each 
one  of  a  hundred  communicants,  is  not  guilty  of  more  credulity  and 
superstition,  than  the  man  who  believes  in  the  prelatic  doctrine 
of  priestly  prerogatives  derived  through  a  pretended  Apostolical 
succession  ;  and  who  ventures,  in  that  faith,  to  commit  his  soul  to 
the  efficacy  of  sacraments  administered  by  the  hands  of  any 
particular  man,  in  the  confidence  that  that  man  possesses  such 
a  transmitted  Apostolical  virtue. 

Yet  this  is  the  ground  on  which  it  is  claimed  that  there  can 
be  no  Church  without  a  Bishop!  This  is  the  ground  on  which 
Episcopal  clergymen  tell  the  ministers  of  all  other  denomina- 
tions of  Christians,  that  they  are  no  ministers  of  Christ,  but 
followers  of  Korah  !  And  though  low  churchmen  reject  these 
claims,  yet  they  allow  themselves,  by  the  unchristian  and 
wicked  canons  of  their  Church,  to  be  compelled  into  this  un- 
kind and  contemptuous  treatment  of  all  other  ministers  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ!  They  sometimes  tell  us,  "We  would  if 
we  could  treat  you  as  ministers  of  Christ ;  but  the  Canons  for- 
bid us."  Ought  they  not  seriously  to  reflect  upon  the  right  of 
any  Christian  men,  and  especially  of  Christian  ministers,  to  treat 
the  Lord's  ministers  and  people  in  this  injurious  manner,  out 
of  obedience  to  any  mere  human  canons  ?  Would  not  the  same 
principle  have  justified  them  in  acquiescing  in  canons  which 
sent  the  people  of  Christ  to  the  dungeon,  or  to  the  stake,  had  they 
lived  at  the  times  when  such  .canons  were  in  force?  "  He 
that  is  unjust  in  the  least,  is  unjust  also  in  much." 
Obedience  to  such  canons,  countenances  the  pestilent  false 
doctrine  on  which  such  canons  are  grounded  ;  it  abets  the 
turning  of  the  Gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  into  substan- 
tial Popery ;  and  more  than  this,  obedience  to  such  canons, 
contrary  to  one's  own  conviction  of  their  justice,  is  treason 
against  one's  own  conscience  and  against  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  There  is  a  great  eternal  law  of  truth  and  righteous- 
ness, which  is  paramount  to  all  canons  of  Church  enactment; 
and  low  churchmen  should  see  to  it,  that  they  do  not,  out  of 
obedience  to  the  traditions  of  men,  make  void  the  law  of  God. 

Such,  then,  is  the  Apostolical  succession  as  a  DOCTRINE,  and  as  a 
FACT  :  as  a,  doctrine,  unfounded  in  Scripture,  and  contradictory  to 
it; — injurious  to  the  sole  and  eternal  priesthood  of  Christ,  and  con- 
stituting the  fundamental  principle  of  Popery.  As  a.  fact,  it  is  ten 
thousand  times  over  a  falsehood  :  the  pretended  succession  being 
broken  and  shivered  at  every  turn.  Rome  may  be  challenged 
to  produce  a  doctrine  more  erroneous  in  theory,  more  false  in 
fact,  or  involving  a  greater  amount  of  mischief  and  absurdity. 
Mormonisrn  itself  is  not  a  combination  of  greater  superstition, 


390  •   THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

fanaticism,  and  folly.  And  yet  this  is  the  doctrine  on  which  the 
exclusive  claims  of  Prelacy  are  all  based !  The  alternative  of 
Bishop  Brownell  is  true  and  inevitable :  "  If  a  regular  ministe- 
rial succession  in  the  order  of  Bishops  be  not  conformable  to  Scrip- 
ture  and  Apostolic  usage,  Episcopacy  is  an  unjustifiable  usurpa- 
tion." It  is  even  so.  Whoever  receives  a  jure  divino  Episco- 
pacy, must  of  necessity  swallow  the  doctrine  of  Apostolical 
succession,  with  all  its  falsehoods  and  absurdities.  Whoever 
cannot  swallow  that  doctrine,  must  of  necessity  throw  the  claims 
of  Episcopacy  away  as  an  "unjustifiable  usurpation." 

It  is  not  surprising  to  find  the  same  charge,  in  which  the 
"  Bishop  of  Connecticut "  advocates  the  doctrine  of  Apostolical 
succession,  rejecting  the  "Bible  alone"  as  the  sole  and  suffi- 
cient standard  of  faith,  and  placing  over  it  the  interpretations  of 
the  Fathers,  or  of  the  Church.  It  is  not  surprising  to  find  the 
right  of  private  judgment  treated,  in  the  same  charge,  as  one  of 
"  the  errors  of  the  times  ;"  and  the  doctrine  of  Baptismal  Re- 
generation affirmed  with  all  assurance.  Pernicious  doctrines, 
unlike  other  ravenous  beasts  of  prey,  are  not  wont  to  go  solitary. 
Around  the  doctrine  of  Apostolical  succession,  these  other  false 
doctrines  concerning  the  Rule  of  Faith,  the  right  of  private  judg- 
ment, and  Regeneration,  cluster,  as  around  their  natural  centre 
and  sun. 

In  rejecting  the  idea  that  the  Christian  ministry  is  a  propitia- 
tory priesthood,  we  of  necessity  reject  the  doctrine  of  Apostoli- 
cal succession.  The  contest  comes  inevitably  on  to  the  ground 
of  the  Reformation :  the  very  identical  battle-ground  between  the 
Reformation  and  Rome.  Between  the  two  schemes  of  justifica- 
tion by  faith  alone,  and  justification  through  the  offices  of  a 
human  priesthood,  there  can  be  no  peace  :  and  there  never  ought 
to  be  peace  between  them,  while  the  truth,  the  rights  of  con- 
science, and  the  way  of  salvation,  are  things  of  any  interest  in 
the  estimation  of  mankind. 


XXXI. 


ECONOMY  OF  CHURCH  GOVERNMENT. 

Ordination.  Headship  of  the  Church.  Episcopacy  and  Republicanism. 
Episcopacy  in  the  American  Revolution.  Reproaches  against  the  Puri- 
tans. The  tables  turned.  Comparative  tendencies  of  Puritanism  and 
Prelacy.  Conclusion. 

HAVING  disposed  of  the  claims  of  the  Bishops,  and  shown  the 
falsity  and  essential  Popery  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Apostolical 
succession,  there  are  several  other  topics  which  cajl  for  a  brief 
but  distinct  examination. 

I.    WHAT    IS    ORDINATION  ? 

Rejecting  as  we  do  the  doctrine  of  Apostolical  succession,  as 
well  as  the  ghostly  character  which  the  rite  of  ordination  is  sup- 
posed to  impress  upon  him  who  receives  it,  it  will  probably  be 
asked  what  we  make  of  it.  The  answer  is  at  hand. 

Ordination  is  the  solemn  setting  apart  of  a  person  to  the  work 
of  the  ministry.  We  no  more  hold  that  any  person  may  take 
upon  himself  the  office  and  work  of  the  Christian  ministry,  than 
that  he  may  take  upon  himself  the  office  and  work  of  a  civil 
magistrate.  But  ordination  no  more  impresses  an  internal  char- 
acter upon  a  man,  than  does  an  induction  to  a  civil  office. 

We  have  already  seen  that  in  the  appointment  of  Matthias 
to  the  Apostleship,  and  in  the  appointment  of  Deacons,  the  peo- 
ple were  called  to  a  popular  election ;  and  this  seems  to  be  re- 
corded as  a  suitable  precedent  and  warrant  for  a  like  manner  of 
proceeding  in  cases  of  a  similar  nature.  And  election  by  popu- 
lar suffrage  happens  to  be  the  expression  of  the  original,  where  it 
is  said,  "  And  when  they  had  ordained  them  elders." 

After  the  election  there  is  an  induction  to  office.  A  magistrate 
is  to  be  sworn  into  office  by  an  accredited  magistrate ;  but  the 
President  of  the  United  States  may  be  inducted  into  office  by 
any  magistrate  who  may  administer  a  lawful  oath ;  by  a  justice 
of  the  peace,  as  well  as  by  the  Chief  Justice  of  the  nation.  But 
it  is  not  from  the  inducting  officer  that  he  receives  the  power  with 


392  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

which  he  is  clothed;  that  comes  from  his  election;  though  till 
he  is  regularly  inducted  he  can  exercise  no  power. 

So,  for  the  sake  of  order,  one  must  ordinarily  be  inducted  into 
fhe  ministry  by  ministers.  Hence,  the  "  laying  on  of  the  hands 
of  the  Presbytery  ;"  and  without  this,  it  would  be  improper  for 
one  to  take  upon  himself  the  functions  of  the  Christian  ministry. 

If  it  be  said  that  Christian  ministers  act  for  God,  and  therefore 
must  receive  their  authority  from  him;  it  is  granted.  So  the 
civil  magistrate  is  the  "  minister  of  God  ;''  and  "  the  powers  that 
be,  are  ordained  of  God ;"  but  must  they  always  be  ordained  by. 
the  instrumentality  of  superiors?  Must  they  always  receive  their 
authority,  not  by  the  instrumentality  of  those  below  them,  but  by 
a  regular  transmitted  succession  from  those  originally  set  in  office 
directly  by  the  Divine  hand  ?  The  sage  maxim  which  some  are 
so  fond  of  harping  on,  viz.  that  "  inferiors  cannot  ordain  a  supe- 
rior," nor  "  give  an  office  that  they  do  not  possess,"  is  a  mere 
sophism.  The  people,  who  have  no  office,  elect  their  governors, 
and  inferior  magistrates  induct  them  into  office  ;  yet  the  Gov- 
ernor of  Connecticut  and  the  President  of  the  United  States,  are 
as  much  "  ordained  of  God"  and  as  much  "  God's  ministers," 
as  though  they  had  been  elected  and  inducted  by  Queen  Victo- 
ria, or  the  Emperor  Nicholas,  or  by  any  other  of  the  so  called 
"  legitimate  sovereigns,"  who  can  trace  their  gubernatorial  sue' 
cession  clear  back  to  Nero,  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  or  to  Nimrod. 

Although  magistrates  must  ordinarily  be  ordained  by  magis- 
trates, yet  all  people  have  a  natural  right  of  originating  a  civil 
government,  and  of  course,  originating  ordinations  of  powers,  as 
often  as  necessity  requires.  This  was  done  when  the  Pilgrims 
subscribed  their  Constitution  in  the  cabin  of  the  Mayflower. 

At  the  American  Revolution  the  people  acted  on  the  same 
principle  ;  they  went  not  begging  at  the  foot  of  European  thrones 
for  the  grant  of  Rulers  of  the  true  legitimate  succession;  they 
originated  their  own  magistracies,  and  their  own  laws.  And 
though  there  is  no  power  but  of  God,  yet  who  questions  'that 
Washington, and  the  Trurnbulls,  were  as  much  "ordained  of  God" 
as  any  ruler  that  ever  bore  the  sword  of  authority;  and  that  he 
who  resisted  the  magistrates  and  laws  so  instituted,  resisted  "  the 
ordinance  of  God" 

Now,  though  for  the  sake  of  order,  Christian  ministers  should 
be  ordained  through  the  instrumentality  of  Christian  ministers, 
still  Christ's  people  everywhere  have  a  right,  by  Divine  charier 
and  command,  to  keep  all  his  commandments,  and  to  enjoy  all 
his  ordinances  ;  and,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Pilgrims,  and  of  our 
fathers  in  the  Revolution,  when  need  requires,  the  right,  is  inhe- 
rent, and  the  duty  is  imperative,  to  originate  those  institutions 
and  ordinations ;  and  he  who  is  thus  duly  ordained  a  minister 


WHAT    IS    ORDINATION.  393 

in  Christ's  Church,  is  as  much  the  minister  of  God  as  the  present 
magistrates  in  these  United  States.  For  example  :  when  the 
persecuted  disciples  of  Christ  met  and  worshipped  in  secret,  in 
the  reign  of  bloody  Mary,  they  had  indeed  a  lawfully  ordained 
minister,  but  had  he  been  slain,  they  might  lawfully,  if  need  re- 
quired, have  appointed  others.  In  fine,  wherever  the  Gospel 
goes,  without  Bishops,  or  Church  officers  of  any  sort,  it  may, 
where  need  requires,  originate  true  Churches,  and  valid  ordina- 
tions. Christ's  people  have  an  ample  charter  for  doing  among 
themselves,  whatever  is  essential  to  the  observing  of  his  ordi- 
nances and  the  keeping  of  his  commands. 

While  we  hold  this  theory,  it  is  proper  to  observe  that  none  of 
our  ordinations  were  so  originated  in  fact.  The  first  ministers 
of  the  Puritan  Churches,  both  in  the  Old  world,  and  in  the 
New,  were  regularly  ordained  and  acknowledged  ministers  of 
Christ;  and  from  that  time  our  ministers  have  been  regularly 
ordained  by  "the  laying  on  of  the  hands"  of  the  acknowledged 
"  Presbytery." 

Episcopacy  rejects  this  view  of  ordination.  In  its  view,  ordi- 
nation must  impress  a  ghostly  character,  and  come  down  from 
the  Apostles  by  an  official  succession.  Accordingly,  at  the  Revo- 
lution, the  Episcopalians  in  this  country  still  remained  in  an 
abject  dependence  on  the  King  of  Great  Britain  and  his  Parlia- 
ment ;  a  dependence  for  that  which  is  more  than  liberty,  for  the 
bread  of  life. 

Unfortunately,  the  Bishops  of  England  might  not  ordain  any 
person  to  the  Episcopate  without  the  royal  mandate  for  the 
election  and  consecration  of  a  person  nominated  by  the  King  as 
head  of  the  Church  :  nor  then,  without  requiring  such  person  to 
take  the  oath  of  allegiance,  and  the  oath  of  obedience  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Our  American  Episcopalians  were 
in  deep  trouble.  Civil  independence  was  secured ;  but  for 
dearer  rights,  they  were  still  dependent  on  the  will  of  a  foreign 
king.  After  due  supplication,  and  after  much  difficulty  and  de- 
lay, an  act  of  Parliament  was  passed  for  the  consecration  of 
some  American  Bishops ;  but  under  the  restriction,  that  the  per- 
sons appointed  should  be  acceptable  to  the  Archbishops  of  Can- 
terbury and  York,  and  then  obtain  the  royal  license  "  by  warrant 
under  his  royal  signet  and  sign  manual."* 

*  The  following  letter  of  Dr  Franklin,  exhibits  a  common  sense  view  of  the  matter, 
To  Messrs.  Weems  and  Grant,  Citizens  of  the  United  States,  in  London  : 

PARIS,  18th  July,  1784. 

Gentlemen — On  receipt  of  your  letter  acquainting  me  that  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  would  not  permit  you  to  be  ordained  unless  you  took  the  oath  of  allegi- 
ance, I  applied  to  a  clergyman  of  my  acquaintance  for  information  on  the  subject  of 
your  obtaining  ordination  here.'  His  opinion  was,  that  it  could  not  be  done  ;  and 


394  TtfE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

In  our  view,  this  begging  for  the  succession  at  the  hands  of  a 
British  king  and  Parliament,  was  the  fruit  of  a  grievous  and 
humiliating  superstition.  It  was  just  as  childish  and  absurd  as 
it  would  have  been  for  the  people,  after  their  successful  Revolu- 
tion, to  go  and  beg  the  King  to  give  to  his  revolted  colonies,  ru- 
lers of  the  true  legitimate  succession,  under  the  notion  that  with- 
out such  a  succession  from  the  order  of  Kings,  there  could  not 
be  a  state  ;  and  that  without  this  virtue  flowing  down  through  a 
kingly  succession,  there  could  be  no  magistrates  "  ordained  of 
God."  Jure  divino  Episcopalians  ought,  in  all  reason,  \obejure 
divino  Legitimists.  And  he  who  should  begin  to  charge  all  our 
governors  and  magistrates  as  usurpers,  declaring  that  the  people 

that  if  it  were  done,  you  would  be  required  to  vow  obedience  to  the  Archbishop  of 
Paris.  I  next  inquired  of  the  Pope's  Nuncio  whether  you  might  not  be  ordained 
by  the  Bishop  of  America,  powers  being  sent  him  for  the  purpose — if  he  has  them 
not  already.  The  answer  was,  the  thing  is  impossible,  unless  the  gentlemen  be- 
come Catholics.  This  is  an  affair  of  which  I  know  but  very  little,  and  therefore  I 
may  ask  questions  and  propose  means  that  are  improper  or  impracticable.  But 
what  is  the  necessity  of  your  being  connected  with  the  Church  of  England  ? 
Would  it  not  do  as  well,  if  you  were  of  the  Church  of  Ireland  ?  The  religion  is 
the  same,  though  there  is  a  different  set  of  Bishops  and  Archbishops.  Perhaps  if 
you  were  to  apply  to  the  Bishop  of  Derry,  who  is  a  man  of  liberal  sentiments,  he 
might  give  you  orders,  as  of  that  Church.  If  both  Britain  and  Ireland  refuse  you, 
(and  I  am  not  sure  that  the  Bishop  of  Denmark  or  Sweden  would  ordain  you  un- 
less you  became  Lutherans),  what  is  then  to  be  done  ?  Next  to  becoming  Presby- 
terians, the  Episcopalian  clergy  of  America,  in  my  humble  opinion,  cannot  do  bet- 
ter than  to  follow  the  example  of  the  first  clergy  in  Scotland  soon  after  the  conver- 
sion of  that  country  to  Christianity,  when  their  king  had  built  the  Cathedral  of  St. 
Andrews,  and  requested  the  king  of  Northumberland  to  lend  his  Bisliops  to  ordain 
one  of  them,  that  their  clergy  might  not,  as  heretofore,  be  obliged  to  go  to  Northum- 
berland for  orders ;  and  their  request  was  refused.  They  assembled  in  the  Cathe- 
dral, and  the  mitre,  crozier,  and  robes  of  a  Bishop  being  laid  upon  the  altar,  they, 
after  earnest  prayers  for  direction  in  their  choice,  elected  one  of  their  own  number, 
when  the  king  said  to  him,  "  jlrise,  go  to  the  Altar,  and  receive  your  qffiee  at  the  hand 
of  God."  His  brethren  led  him  to  the  altar,  robed  him,  put  the  erozier  in  his  hand, 
and  he  became  the  first  Bishop  of  Scotland. 

If  the  British  Islands  were  sunk  in  the  sea  (and  the  surface  of  the  globe  has  suf- 
fered greater  changes),  you  would  probably  take  some  such  method  as  this  ;  and  if 
they  persist  in  denying  your  ordination,  it  is  the  same  thing.  A  hundred  years 
hence,  when  people  are  more  enlightened,  it  will  be  wondered  at,  that  men  in  Ame- 
rica, qualified  by  their  learning  and  piety  to  pray  for  and  instruct  their  neighbors, 
should  not  be  permitted  to  do  it,  till  they  had  made  a  voyage  of  six  thousand  miles 
out  and  home,  to  ask  leave  of  a  cross  old  gentleman  at  Canterbury,  who  seems  by 
your  account  to  have  as  little  regard  for  the  souls  of  the  people  of  Maryland,  as 
King  William's  attorney,  general  Seymour,  had  for  those  of  Virginia.  The  Rever- 
end Commissary  Blair,  who  projected  the  College  of  that  province,  and  was  in  Eng- 
land to  solicit  benefactions  and  a  charter,  relates  that  the  Queen,  in  the  King's  ab- 
sence, having  ordered  Seymour  to  draw  up  the  charter,  which  was  to  be  given  with 
£2000  in  money,  he  opposed  the  grant,  saying  that  the  Nation  was  engaged  in'  an 
expensive  war,  that  the  money  was  wanted  for  better  purposes,  and  he  did  not  see 
the  least  occasion  for  a  College  in  Virginia.  Blair  represented  to  him  that  its  in- 
tention was  to  educate  and  qualify  young  men  to  be  ministers  of  the  Gospel,  much 
wanted  there,  and  begged  Mr.  Attorney  would  consider  that  the  people  of  Virginia 

had  souls  to  be  saved  as  well  as  those  of  England.    "  Souls  "  said  he,  " 

your  souls:  make  Tobacco" 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  gentlemen,  &c., 

B.  FRANKLIH. 


HEADSHIP  OP  THE  CHURCH.  395 

— under  penalty  of  the  divine  displeasure — must  abandon  their 
present  rulers,  and  submit  to  exactors  and  officers  deriving  their 
legitimate  gubernatorial  virtue  through  some  lineal  successor  of 
Nimrod  or  Nebuchadnezzar,  would  not  be  guilty  of  a  more  ridi- 
culous fanaticism  than  th$>se  are,  who  gravely  maintain  that  there 
cannot  be  "  a  Church  without  a  Bishop  " — of  the  true  Apostoli- 
cal succession. 

II.    HEADSHIP    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Late  Episcopal  works  largely  and  frequently  insist  that  non- 
Episcopal  sects  are  without  a  visible  headship.  To  this  and 
kindred  objections,  we  answer : 

1.  That  the  ends  of  Church  government  are  few  and  sim- 
ple.    They  are  simply  to  observe  Christ's  ordinances,  and  to 
promote  the  spiritual  edification  of  his  members.     If  any  turn 
heretics  or  walk  disorderly  and  cannot  be  reclaimed,  the  congre- 
gation of  Christians  to  which  they  belong,  may  cast  them  out  of 
their  society.     The  public  worship  of  God  and  the  enjoyment 
of  his  ordinances,  require  nothing  beyond    a  single  congrega- 
tion.     This  is  all  the  law-making  and  government  for  which 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  has  made  provision.     These  Churches 
may  associate  for  mutual  counsel,  edification  and  security;  but 
no    universal   or   provincial   legislature   is   needed    over   these 
Churches.     Christ  established  none.      No  new  laws  are  to  be 
made  ;  no  canons  are  to  be  framed  or  enforced  beyond  the  Word 
of  God. 

2.  All  further  headship  is  not  only  unauthorized,  but  it  has 
proved  the  source  of  nearly  all  the  persecutions,  superstitions, 
and  corruptions  that  have  infested  and  distracted  the  Church  of 
Christ.     Had  there  been  no  Prelatical  power,  how  early  and  how 
surely  would  the  Reformation  have  been  accomplished?     Had 
there  been  no  Henry  VIII.,  or  Mary,  or  Elizabeth,  or  Bonner, 
or  Gardiner,  to  lord  it  over  the  consciences  of  men,  how  rapidly 
would  the  Reformation  have  chased  away  all  Popish  darkness 
from  England  ?     And  with  all  the  power  and  energy  of  earthly 
heads  and  Prelates,  in  spite  of  all  their  dungeons   and  faggots, 
how  hard  the  usurping  Prelates  found  it,  to  keep  the  people  down  ? 
Had  not  Prelacy  suppressed  the  rising  Reformation  in  Italy,  in 
Spain,  in  France,  and  in  Austria,  how  would  those   benighted 
nations,  long  ere  this,  have  rejoiced  in  the  light  and  freedom  of 
the  children  of  God?     Prelacy  has  ever  been,  as  a  system,  hos- 
tile to  religious  freedom,  and   hostile  to    Gospel  truth.     And 
therefore,  and  the  more,  since  Christ  did  not  establish,  but  for- 
bade the  assumption  of  Prelatical  power,  we  admit  no  earthly 
head  over  the  Churches  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ. 

3.  The  ends   and   powers  of  Church  government  being  so 


396  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

simple,  and  Christ  not  only  having  given  no  legislative  authori- 
ty, but  having  denounced  a  wo  upon  those  who  shall  add  to  the 
things  written  in  his  Book,  we  acknowledge  the  BIBLE  as  the 
only  AUTHORITATIVE  statute  book  over  the  Church. 

But  turn  to  the  Prelatical  scheme,  ^rook  at  its  Diocesan,  and 
its  National  Canons.  For  ages  it  was  much  as  any  strong- 
minded  man  could  attain  in  a  life  time,  to  make  himself  master 
of  the  science  of  canon  law.  The  Episcopal  Church  in  this 
country  is  yet  in  its  infancy  ;  and  taking  advantage  of  our  civil 
Revolution,  and  of  some  important  lessons  which  both  Congrega- 
tional and  Presbyterian  Republicanism  had  taught  her,  she  shook 
off  at  once,  a  mountain  load  of  incumbrances,  which  yet  burden 
the  Episcopal  establishments  of  Europe.  But  let  any  one  take 
up  the  work  of  Dr.  Hawkes  on  the  Constitutions  and  Canons, 
and  he  will  be  struck  with  the  immense  amount  of  tinkering 
already  expended  in  mending,  and  altering,  and  simplifying,  and 
correcting,  the  canons  of  that  infant  Church.  Even  Dr.  Hawkes 
confessedly  staggers  under  the  load.  He  apologizes  for  his  ina- 
bility to  fix  the  meaning  and  to  settle  the  conflicts  of  these  re- 
spective sets  of  canons.  Like  a  pioneer  in  a  tangled  wilderness, 
he  says  of  his  work :  "  It  may  make  a  road  in  the  wilderness, 
which,  though  rough,  will  not  be  useless  to  future  travellers" 
There  are  Diocesan  Canons,  and  National  Canons.  Some 
Bishops  have  an  absolute  veto  upon  the  enactment  of  canons  in 
their  territories;  others  have  not.  "  Primitive  Bishops,"  says  Dr. 
Hawkes,  "  knew  but  little  of  Conventions  like  ours."  And  with 
all  this  lumber  of  canons,  Dr.  Hawkes  complains  that,  "in  the 
Church,5'  they  have  "  no  judicial  system ;"  "  Uniformity  in  fu- 
dicial proceedings  is  wanting."  "But  there  is  a  greater  evil  in 
the  want  of  uniformity  of  interpretations"  He  applies  the  max- 
im, "  Miser  a  est  servitas  ubi  jus  est  vagum  aut  incertum"  [It  is 
a  miserable  slavery  where  the  law  is  either  vague  or  uncertain.] 
And  he  shows  that  such  is  the  state  of  their  Canon  law, 
that  the  actual  interpretation  of  their  Canons  makes  the  law 
one  thing  in  Massachusetts,  and  another  thing  in  South 
Carolina.  "  In  vain,''  says  he,  "  will  any  one  ask,  what  is 
the  law  ?  Nowhere  in  the  Church  is  there  any  tribunal  com- 
petent to  adjust  these  conflicting  interpretations"  He  shows 
that  there  is  no  relief,  either  in  a  General  Convention,  or  in  the 
House  of  Bishops ;  that  this  is  a  question  "  practically  of  great 
difficulty;"  that  they  need  something  like  a  Supreme  Court; 
and  protests  that  the  members  of  that  court  ought  to  be  selected 
for  their  fitness,  and  that  this  work  cannot  safely  be  entrusted, 
ex-officio,  "  to  the  Bishops." 

How  long  will  it  be  ere  our  Episcopal  brethren  will  need,  like 
the  Papists,  doctors  of  Canon  law?  So  cumbersome  has  the 


EPISCOPACY  AND  REPUBLICANISM.  397 

scheme  already  become,  in  consequence   of  departing  from  the 
simplicity  of  Christ! 

But  the  mischief  of  having  .NO  HEAD!  Is  Protestant  Episco- 
pacy free  from  this  difficulty  ?  The  Pope  will  tell  them,  No. 
With  a  general  government,  and  National  laws,  they  have  no 
National  court,  and  no  National  head.  Even  the  house  of  Bish- 
ops, the  very  apex  of  the  system,  has  borrowed  from  Congrega- 
tionalism its  simple  moderator.  What  is  the  one  indivisible 
Catholic  Church  on  their  plan  ?  A  huge  disjointed  body  with- 
out a  head;  not  even  a  Cerberus  with  three  heads,  nor  yet  a 
hydra  with  fifty,  but  a  body  covered  all  over  with  some  thou- 
sand headlings,  over  which  there  is  no  real  head !  Why, 
truly,  on  this  argument,  our  Episcopal  brethren  should  either 
resort  to  Queen  Victoria,  or  to  the  Pope,  to  assume  the  headship 
over  them ;  or  else  they  should  forthwith  meet  and  create  a  Me- 
tropolitan, or  Archbishop,  or  a  Patriarch. 

III.    EPISCOPACY    AND    REPUBLICANISM. 

It  is  further  claimed,  that  Episcopacy  bears  the  strongest  re- 
semblance to,  and  is  most  in  accordance  with,  our  Republican 
Institutions.  The  House  of  Bishops  is  compared  to  the  United 
States  Senate,  and  the  several  Bishops,  to  the  governors  of  the 
several  States ;  then  there  are  lay  delegates,  and  vestrymen,  de- 
riving their  authority  from  popular  elections. 

It  is  true,  that  those  who  see  Prelacy  in  this  country,  see  it 
greatly  modified  by  our  republican  institutions.  But  this  is  the 
only  country  on  earth,  where  Prelacy  admits  of  any  such  thing 
as  popular  rights.  Dr.  Hawkes  has  recorded  what  strenuous 
efforts  were  made,  by  Bishop  Seabury,  against  admitting  any 
popular  element  into  the  government  of  the  Church.  That  dis- 
tinguished Prelate  "  disapproved  of  committing  the  general  con- 
cerns of  the  American  Church  to  any  other  than  Bishops,"  and 
considered  the  introduction  of  the  Laity  as  "  incongruous  to  every 
idea  of  Episcopal  government."  Such,. in  theory,  is  the  doc- 
trine of  High-Churchmen :  the  laity  hold  their  privileges  as  lib- 
erties, not  as  rights :  mere  concession,  held  by  sufferance  of  the 
Bishops. 

But  let  us  look  a  little  into  the  actual  system.  I  will  venture 
to  ask  what  sort  of  resemblance  to  our  Republican  institutions,  a 
system  of  government  would  bear,  if  framed  on  the  following 
principles : 

(1.)  Give  to  each  state  a  Governor  for  life,  to  be  removed 
only  on  an  impeachment  before  a  house  of  Governors  for  life. 
Let  him  hold  his  authority  not  from  the  people,  but  by  Divine 
right,  having  received  a  gubernatorial  grace  and  character  from 
the  sole  gubernatorial  succession. 


398  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

Let  him  hold  a  veto  upon  every  appointment  of  judge  or  jus- 
tice. Give  the  franchises  of  every  citizen  into  this  man's  hands 
alone,  that  by  his  single  sentence  be  may  excommunicate  every 
man  from  all  rights  and  privileges  as  a  citizen,  and  render  any 
man  incapable  of  holding  any  office,  or  of  acting  in  any  primary 
election. 

Give  him  power  to  pack  a  court  of  such  justices  as  he  may 
select,  to  try,  depose,  or  degrade  any  officer  in  the  state  whom  he 
may  order  to  appear  before  that  tribunal. 

(2.)  Bring  these  perpetual  Governors  into  a  perpetual  Senate, 
with  an  absolute  veto  upon  everything  proposed  by  the  Repre- 
sentatives of  the  people  :• — Give  all  executive  authority  into  their 
hands: — Let  there  be  no  Independent  Judiciary, — no  Supreme 
Court ;— but  let  these  perpetual  Governors,  these  perpetual  mem- 
bers of  a  perpetual  Senate ;  these  members  of  an  exclusive  Execu- 
tive department,  be  also  the  sole  expounders  of  the  law,  over 
the  whole  land,  in  their  associate  capacity, — and  each  the  supreme 
judge  as  well  as  sole  Governor  in  his  own  domain. 

Such  is  the  draft  of  a  system  of  Civil  Polity,  which  should 
be  a  parallel  to  our  American  Episcopacy.  How  does  it  com- 
pare with  the  institutions  of  our  American  Republic  ?  There  is 
no  resemblance.  A  more  miserable  oligarchy  never  existed  on  the 
earth,  than  such  a  scheme  would  be,  if  its  analogy  were  faithfully 
carried  out  in  the  form  of  civil  government.  What  dolts  does 
Dr.  Hawkes  take  the  American  people  to  be,  that  he  presumes  so 
complacently  to  claim  a  close  and  essential  resemblance,  between 
the  Episcopal  scheme  and  our  Republican  government  ? 

IV.       EPISCOPACY    IN    THE    AMERICAN  REVOLUTION. 

But  let  us  pass  to  another  extraordinary  claim  put  forth  by 
Episcopal  writers. 

The  Tract,  "  Why  I  am  a  Churchman,"  "  calls  attention  "  to 
another  fact  showing  the  Republican  spirit  and  tendencies  of 
Episcopacy: — Washington,  Jay,  Madison,  Marshall,  and  others, 
were  Episcopalians. 

Is  not  this  a  strange  sort  of  logic,  to  argue  from  a  few  isolated 
facts — altogether  exceptions  to  the  state  of  the  facts  in  general — 
the  general  tendencies  of  any  particular  scheme  ?  La  Fayette, 
Montgomery,  Steuben,  Pulaski,  and  De  Kalb,  are  said  to  have 
been  Roman  Catholics.  Is  Popery,  therefore,  the  friend  of  free- 
dom ?  Shall  the  exception  of  these  great  and  honorable  names 
weigh  down  the  dismal  conclusions  to  be  drawn  from  the  present 
state,  and  the  past  history  of  Spain,  Italy,  Portugal,  and  Austria, 
for  so  many  hundred  years  ?  Washington  was  an  Episcopalian. 
So  be  it.  We  venerate  him  none  the  less.  He  was  less  an 
Episcopalian  th,m  a  Christian.  Washington  was  no  High 


EPISCOPACY  IN  THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION.  399 

Churchman  ;  he  communed  at  the  Lord's  table  with  Presbyte- 
rians. His  religion,  as  well  as  his  patriotism,  rose  above  the 
narrow  limits  of  High  Church  Episcopacy.  It  is  an  outrage 
upon  his  memory,  it  is  a  libel  upon  his  principles  to  use  that  hal- 
lowed name  to  gild  the  low  superstition  of  modern  Puseyism. 
Was  Washington  an  Episcopalian  ?  So  the  revolutionary  Gen- 
eral Greene  was  bred  a  Quaker ;  and  Quaker,  it  is  said,  he  re- 
mained, till  the  battle  of  Lexington  set  his  patriotic  soul  on  fire. 
But  is  the  tendency  of  Quakerism,  therefore,  warlike  ? 

Washington,  and  Greene,  and  Jay,  and  Madison,  and  La  Fay- 
ette,  and  Pulasld,  and  De  Kalb,  would  all  have  stood. among  the 
stauachest  of  the  Puritans,  had  they  existed  in  their  day.  It  is 
impossible  that  such  men  should  ever  have  entered  in}o  the  ty- 
rannical principles  of  Strafford,  or  have  sided  with  the  persecuting 
measures  and  low  superstitions  of  Archbishop  Laud. 

But  since  our  "  attention  "  is  so  earnestly  invited  to  this  topic, 
let  us  look  away  from  a  few  incidental  cases,  to  the  wide  array 
of  facts  which  more  accurately  show  the  spirit  and  'tendencies  of 
the  system.  And,  as  if  so  long  a  history,  from  Henry  VIII.  to 
Queen  Anne,  were  not  sufficient  to  determine  this  point,  let 
us  look  to  that  field  to  which  our  attention  is  specially  called, 
the  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION. 

It  had  long  been  the  avowed  expectation  and  design  of  Epis- 
copalians in  this  country,  that  Diocesan  Bishops  should  be  placed 
over  the  whole  land.  Had  Bishops  been  so  appointed,  they 
would  not  have  been  like  the  present  American  Diocesans,  shorn  of 
all  civil  prerogatives,  and  limited  in  powers  to  their  own  denomi- 
nation. They  would  have  been  possessed  of  powers  belonging  to 
British  Bishops  by  common  law.  Already  had  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  taken  it  upon  himself,  as  the  prerogative  of  his 
See,  to  appoint  Notaries  Public  in  Puritan  New  England.  In 
New  York  the  marriage  licenses  were  stamped  with  the  mitre, 
in  recognition  of  the  Bishop's  claim  to  legal  authority  over  causes 
matrimonial.  The  Governor  of  New  Jersey  held  the  Archbish- 
op's formal  commission  to  act  for  him  in  matrimonial  and  testa- 
mentary affairs.  An  active  correspondence  was  going  on  between 
Episcopalians  here  and  the  authorities  in  Great  Britain,  for  set- 
ting up  Bishops  over  the  whole  land,  with  authority  over  all  the 
inhabitants.  John  Adams  declared  (and  no  man  better  knew) 
thaft  this  was  one  of  the  principal  causes  that  originated  the 
Revolution.  Our  fathers  dreaded  and  feared  such  an  event ; 
and  had  reason  to  suppose  that  they  saw  it  approaching.  In 
this  very  town,*  was  one  of  the  conventions  of  Presbyterian 
and  Congregational  ministers,  of  New  England  and  the  Middle 
Colonies,  held  (which  conventions  were  continued  for  several 

*  Norwalk 


400  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

years  previous  to  the  Revolution),  for  guarding  against  and  de- 
feating the  wily  schemes  of  Prelatists,  for  setting  up  Bishops 
over  the  American  people.*  Such  was  the  state  of  things 
before  the  American  Revolution. 

And  when  the  conflict  came,  where  was  every  Congregational 
and  Presbyterian  minister  in  the  land  ?  At  his  post,  embarking 
everything  for  liberty.  But  where  was  Episcopacy  then  ?  I 
love  not  to  tear  open  old  wounds ;  I  surely  would  never  have 
adverted  to  these  things,  had  not  Episcopacy  been  so  forward  of 
late,  to  make  these  preposterous  claims.  Where  then  were  the 
Episcopal  clergy  of  this  land?  There  were,  indeed,  honorable 
exceptions,  but  what  was  the  general  fact  ? 

Most  of  their  churches  throughout  the  country  were  closed. 
They  had  no  liturgy  to  pray  for  their  country  ;  and  without  the 
authority  of  the  Lord  Bishop  of  London,  they  might  not  indite 
such  a  prayer.  They  could  not  canonically  worship  without 
praying  for  the  success  of  the  tyrant  king,  and  his  more  tyranni- 
cal ministry.  BISHOP  HOBART,  who  lived  too  early  for  these 
new  claims  of  Episcopacy,  gives  the  following  statement  con- 
cerning those  times :  "  Many  of  her  clergy  were  attached  in  prin- 
ciple to  the  Church  and  monarchy  of  Great  Britain  ;  and  not 
caring  to  effect  a  separation  from  her,  abandoned  their  cures,  and 
returned  for  refuge  to  what  till  then  had  been  termed  the  mother 
country."  Ask  the  aged  people  on  these  shores,  who  were  the 
most  dreaded  foes  of  freedom  here  ?  Who  were  the  guides  of 
their  enemies,  in  their  nightly  incursions  for  plunder  and  rapine  ? 
Who  stole  upon  their  dwellings,  to  seize  the  husbands,  or  fathers, 
or  sons,  and  to  carry  them  off  to  the  jails  and  prison-ships,  many 
of  them  never  to  return  ?  Who  ambushed  the  sanctuary  on  the 
Sabbath,  and  with  bayonets  invaded  the  house  of  God,  to  seize 
upon  the  unarmed  worshippers  ?f  The  answer  will  declare  the 
actual  influence  of  the  Prelatical  system,  in  the  days  that  tried 
men's  souls. 

I  say  not  these  things  to  make  those  who  hold  to  the  Prelatic 
scheme  in  these  days  responsible  for  the  deeds  of  their  predeces- 
sors, but  simply  to  meet  the  issue  which  Episcopacy  has  herself 
been  the  first  to  raise  and  urge.  Had  that  system  been  generally 
received  in  that  day,  the  American  Revolution  could  not  have 
taken  place.  Had  that  system  possessed  adequate  strength  in 
New  England,  the  great  contest  would  have  proved  unsuccessful, 

*  The  Journal  of  these  Conventions  has  been  published  by  order  of  the  General 
Association  of  Connecticut,  and  is  a  most  interesting  document  of  those  stirring 
times. 

t  The  congregation  at  Darien  was  surrounded,  while  engaged  in  public  worship 
Dr.  Mather  was  dragged  from  the  pulpit,  and  with  the  men  of  his  congregation 
carried  off  into  captivity.  The  day  that  saw  the  town  of  Norwalk  laid  in  ashes, 
saw  also  the  Rector  of  St.  Paul's  retiring  with  the  marauders  to  the  British  fleet. 


INFERENTIAL  PRESUMPTIONS.  401 

and  the  sun  of  our  country's  hope  would  have  gone  down  in  a 
long  and  dreary  night. 

The  truth  is,  that  Prelacy,  as  a  system,  is  naturally,  and  ever 
has  been,  hostile  to  civil  liberty.  The  principles  of  Puritanism, 
and  of  civil  liberty,  rose  and  flourished  together.  The  doctrine 
of  the  Divine  right  of  Bishops  has  ever  been,  and  by  nature 
must  ever  be,  the  ally  of  despotism.  After  a  contest  scarcely  re- 
mitted for  three  hundred  years,  in  which  Prelacy  strained  every 
nerve  to  put  the  principles  of  civil  and  religious  freedom  down, 
she  now  coolly  turns  about  and  claims  that  she,  above  all  others, 
is  the  best  friend  of  civil  and  religious  liberty. 

V.    REPROACHES    AGAINST    THE    PURITANS. 

Let  us  proceed  to  a  still  more  common  and  favorite  claim  upon 
which  Episcopacy  is  wont  to  vaunt  itself.  I  refer  to  those  re- 
proaches, which  are,  in  some  quarters,  perpetually  cast  upon  the 
Puritan  founders  of  New  England,  and  upon  their  principles, 
viz.  their  austerity,  bigotry,  "  Blue  Laws,"  persecution  of  the 
Quakers  and  Baptists.  "  hanging  witches,"  and  things  of  that 
sort. 

Our  Puritan  Fathers  were  men.  We  freely  confess,  and  la- 
ment, that  they  fell  into  some  grievous  errors,  which,  however, 
were  not  so  peculiarly  theirs,  as  the  common  errors  of  the  times. 
Witches  were  hung  at  that  day  in  Old  England  as  well  as  in  tire 
New.  If  the  Puritan  inhabitants  of  New  England  did  this,  so 
did  the  great  and  good  Sir  Matthew  Hale  ;  yet  the  annals  of 
human  judiciaries  know  no  purer  name. 

Why  do  riot  those  who  insist  upon  these  mournful  errors, 
sometimes  have  the  candor  to  say,  that  in  this,  not  only  did  the 
Puritans  err  in  common  with  the  whole  civilized  world,  but  also 
to  tell  how  large  a  minority  of  the  magistrates  and  people  of 
New  England,  grieved  and  were  indignant  at  these  things,  at 
the  time ;  how  soon  the  magistracy  themselves  corrected  their 
errors ;  how  ingenuously  they  confessed,  and  how  bitterly  they 
mourned  over  these  temporary  delusions  ?  Where  else  in  the 
wide  world  was  such  an  amende  so  speedily  and  so  honorably 
given  to  right  reason,  and  to  truth  ? 

The  Puritans  had  some  erroneous  laws,  which,  in  some  in- 
stances, they  put  in  execution.  Yet  even  then,  their  code  was 
liberal  arid  tolerant  beyond  anything  that  had  ever  been  known 
in  Old  England.  All  their  persecutions  were  as  a  drop  in  the 
ocean  compared  with  those  carried  on  at  the  same  period,  and 
long  after,  in  their  Father-land.  It  was  a  brief  evil,  soon1  corrected, 
and  bitterly  repented.  A  bare  majority  for  a  time  carried  these 
unhappy  measures.  Sorrow  and  indignation  filled  the  hearts  of 
26 


402  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

an  almost  equal  minority,  till  the  good  sense  and  better  feelings 
of  the  people  prevailed. 

In  one  respect  I  am  not  sorry  that  such  a  soot  and  blackness 
should  appear  for  a  season  upon  the  escutcheon  of  Puritanism, 
so  recently  borne  out  from  the  smoke  and  darkness  of  ancient 
systems  of  intolerance  and  abuse.  It  afforded  an  opportunity  to 
show  how  soon  the  principles  of  Puritanism  could  purge  that 
blackness  off.  The  Old  World  has  not  yet  seen  an  example  of 
a  single  denomination  holding  an  absolute  and  controlling  pow- 
er, and  yet  correcting  her  own  errors  by  an  entire  toleration 
of  foreign  hostile  sects.  The  nearest  approach  ever  made  to  this 
in  Old  England,  was  under  Cromwell,  and  during  the  ascenden- 
cy of  the  Independents.  That  is  a  glory  to  which  the  Church 
of  England  has  never  yet  had  the  honor  to  attain. 

But  how  early  did  liberal  views  and  measures  prevail  among 
the  Puritans  of  New  England  ?  Take  some  examples  and  proofs. 
The  first  Episcopal  Church  in  Connecticut  was  established  in 
1723.  It  was  only  four  years  from  this  period,  before  a  law  of 
the  colony  provided,  that  whatever  tax  should  be  paid  for  the 
support  of  religion  by  any  person  belonging  to,  and  worshipping 
with  an  Episcopal  Church,  it  should  be  paid  over  to  the  clergy- 
man of  the  Church  of  England,  upon  whose  ministry  such  per- 
son should  attend.  Those  who  conformed  to  the  Church  of 
England,  were  authorized  to  tax  themselves  for  the  support  of 
their  clergy,  and  were  excused  from  all  taxes  for  building  meet- 
ing-houses, and  for  other  purposes  of  the  Churches  of  the  pre- 
vailing denomination. 

In  1729,  the  Quakers,  a  very  few  of  whom  lived  in  the  parts 
adjacent  to  Rhode  Island,  were,  by  law,  exempted  from  paying 
taxes  for  the  support  of  Congregational  ministers,  and  for  build- 
ing meeting-houses.  In  the  same  year,  the  Baptists,  who  had 
two  small  congregations  in  the  county  of  New  London,  received 
the  same  indulgence.  At  this  time  there  were  in  Connecticut 
but  two  or  three  congregations  of  Episcopalians,  and  two  of 
Baptists;  all  of  which  were  small;  and  no  congregation  of 
Quakers  in  the  colony.* 

This  relaxation  in  the  laws,  made  so  soon  after  dissent  assumed 
a  regular  form,  and  probably  on  its  first  application  to  the  Legis- 
lature for  relief,  shows  that  there  prevailed  in  Connecticut,  at  the 
time,  no  serious  disposition  to  persecute  or  oppress  the  people  of 
other  denominations. 

Is  it  replied,  that  they  erred  in  making  any  ecclesiastical  estab- 
lishment at  all :  and  that  there  should  have  been  an  entire 
equality  of  all  denominations  ?  Granted ;  that  is  undoubt- 
edly the  only  correct  system.  But  that  principle  was  not  at 

*  Professor  Kingsley's  Historical  Discourse,  p.  95. 


THE    TABLES    TURNED.  403 

that  period  understood.  It  was  yet  to  be  brought  forth,  as  the 
legitimate  deduction  from  the  great  Puritan  principle,  that  to 
every  man  belongs  the  right  of  entire  freedom  to  worship  God, 
according  to  his  own  conscience ;  a  principle  which  the  Church 
of  England,  which  still  demands  her  tithes  of  all  Dissenters,  and 
still  presses  them  down  by  numerous  and  intolerable  disabilities 
— has  yet  to  learn  ;  a  right,  which  she  has  yet  to  yield,  or  it  will 
ere  long  be  wrested  from  her  unwilling  hands. 

VI.    THE    TABLES    TURNED. 

And  now,  since  the  bigotry  and  intolerance  of  the  Puritans  is 
so  much  insisted  on,  suppose  we  turn  the  tables,  and  inquire 
whether  AMERICAN  PRELACY,  where  she  had  the  POWER,  was  more 
tolerant. 

Episcopacy  was  originally  established  by  law  in  the  colony  of 
Virginia,  In  1618,  a  law  was  enacted  there,  that  "  every  person 
should  go  to  church  on  Sundays  and  Holy  Days,  or  lie  neck  and 
heels  that  night,  and  be  a  slave  to  the  colony  the  following  week." 
For  the  second  offence,  he  was  to  be  a  slave  for  a  month  ;  and  for 
the  third  offence,  a  year  and  a  day.* 

In  1642,  a  law  was  passed  forbidding  any  other  than  an  Epis- 
copal minister  to  officiate  in  the  colony. 

"  The  established  clergy,"  says  Dr.  Miller  (Life  of  Rodgers,  p. 
31),  "  were  many  of  them  notoriously  profligate  in  their  lives;  and 
very  few  among  them  preached,  or  appeared  to  understand  the 
Gospel  of  Christ."  A  revival  of  religion  broke  out  in  Hanover 
and  the  adjoining  counties,  from  the  perusal  of  some  religious 
books ;  one  of  which  was  Boston's  Fourfold  State.  People 
found  the  Gospel  to  be  a  different  thing  from  that  which  was 
taught  in  the  pulpits  of  the  establishment.  Many  were  awaken- 
ed and  converted.  This  was  between  A.  D.  1730  and  1740. 
The  people  continued  to  meet  and  to  read  books  and  printed 
sermons.  At  length,  private  houses  became  too  small,  and  they 
erected  a  house  for  their  accommodation.  The  vengeance  of 
the  established  Church  fell  upon  them,  in  the  shape  of  fines,  and 
whatever  other  molestations  the  laws  gave  power  to  inflict. 

This  was  the  origin  of  Presbyterian  ism  in  Virginia.  In  1743, 
these  inquiring  people  sent  for  Mr.  Robinson,  a  Presbyterian 
Evangelist.  Multitudes  began  to  inquire,  What  must  we  do  to 
be  saved  ?  Other  preachers  succeeded  Mr.  Robinson  :  but  the 
established  Church  was  now  aroused.  The  celebrated  Messrs. 
Tennent  and  Finley,  obtaining  license  of  the  Governor,  began 
to  preach  to  those  inquirers  in  1745.  A  proclamation  was  some 
time  after  set  up  about  the  meeting-house  on  a  Lord's  day,  strict- 
ly requiring  all  magistrates  to  suppress  and  prohibit  all  itinerant 

*  Miller's  Life  of  Dr.  Rodgers. 


404  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

preachers.  The  celebrated  President  Dames  preached  to  the 
same  people,  having  obtained  the  Governor's  license  for  himself 
and  four  meeting-houses.  But  this  good  nature  on  the  part  of 
the  governor,  met  with  a  prompt  and  stern  rebuke.  "With  great 
difficulty  he  prevailed  on  the  court  not  to  revoke  the  license  of 
Davies,  and  send  him  out  of  the  colony.  The  venerable  John 
Rodgers,  afterwards  of  New  York,  was  forbidden  to  preach  in 
Virginia,  "  under  penalty  of  £500,  and  a  year's  imprisonment 
without  bail  or  mainprize."  And  all  this  was  not  so  very  long 
ago;  for  Dr.  Rodgers  died  so  recently  as  1811. 

The  exclusive  spirit  of  Episcopacy  reigned  triumphant  in 
New  York  down  to  the  very  close  of  the  Revolution.  Some 
Presbyterians  in  Jamaica,  had  erected  a  commodious  house  of 
worship,  and  procured  a  handsome  parsonage  and  glebe,  which 
they  had  held  some  years  previous  to  1702.  A  few  Episcopa- 
lians having  settled  in  the  town,  considering  the  Presbyterians 
defenceless  by  law,  seized  the  church,  between  a  morning  and 
afternoon  service,  and  endeavored  to  hold  it  for  their  own  sect. 
Lord  Cornbury,  the  governor,  retiring  that  year  from  New  York, 
on  account  of  a  malignant  fever,  was  courteously  granted  the 
use  of  the  parsonage  :  but  when  he  returned  to  New  York  he 
delivered  it  into  the  hands  of  the  Episcopalians,  who  deemed  it 
not  dishonorable  to  receive  it.* 

The  first  Presbyterian  minister  who  preached  in  the  city  of 
New  York,  in  a  private  house,  and  baptized  a  child  on  that  oc- 
casion, was  pursued  to  Newtown,  and  led  a  prisoner  in  triumph, 
by  a  circuitous  route,  through  Jamaica,  and  committed  to  prison 
in  New  York.  Nor  was  he  suffered  to  depart  till  there  had  been 
extorted  from  him  a  sum  equal  to  all  the  fees  and  expenses  of 
his  prosecution  ;  amounting  to  between  two  and  three  hundred 
dollars. 

After  a  Presbyterian  Church  had  been  organized  in  New  York, 
"  for  the  greater  part  of  a  century  they  were  compelled,  besides 
supporting  their  own  Church,  to  contribute  their  quota  toward 
the  support  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  already  enriched  by  gov- 
ernmental favor."f 

While  these  governmental  benefactions  were  laying  the  foun- 
dation of  the  present  enormous  wealth  of  Trinity  Church,  the 
Presbyterians  suffered  under  every  discouragement  which  the 
ruling  powers  could  interpose.  In  1719,  the  first  Presbyterian 
Church  in  New  York  was  erected,  in  no  small  share  by  public 
collections  taken  up  in  the  colony  of  Connecticut  and  in  Scotland. 
The  direct  and  strenuous  efforts  of  the  vestry  of  Trinity  Church, 
defeated  their  repeated  applications  for  a  charter.  The  Presby- 
terian Church,  thus  holding  their  edifice  by  an  uncertain  tenure, 

*  Miller's  Life  of  John  Rodgers.  t  Ibid. 


THE    TABLES    TURNED.  405 

were  compelled  for  a  series  of  years,  in  order  to  secure  it,  to  cause 
the  title  to  be  conveyed  to  the  moderator  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  Suffering  under  other  legal  dis- 
abilities, they  again  applied  for  a  charter  in  1759,  and  were  again 
opposed  and  defeated  by  the  strenuous  opposition  of  the  Episco- 
pal Church.  In  1774,  and  1775,  they  laid  their  embarrassments, 
with  their  complaint  and  petition,  at  the  foot  of  the  throne.  A 
charter  was  drawn,  and  passed  the  Council:  but  on  this  side  of 
the  water,  the  influence  which  had  opposed,  now  withheld  the 
gift  of  the  sovereign. 

Thus,  up  to  the  very  year  of  the  Revolution,  was  this  intoler- 
ance exercised  by  Prelacy  in  New  York,  till  that  Revolution 
carne  and  broke  the  sceptre  of  her  power  for  ever.  Such  was 
Puritanism,  and  such  was  Prelacy,  with  regard  to  the  matter  of 
toleration  in  the  provinces,  where,  for  a  season,  each  held  the  con- 
trolling power ;  the  first  voluntarily  and  promptly  correcting  her 
errors,  and  granting  all  other  denominations  every  privilege,  con- 
sistent with  the  views  of  religious  establishments,  unfortun- 
ately everywhere  prevalent  at  that  day ;  the  last,  grasping  the 
sceptre  with  an  iron  hand,  yielding  nothing,  holding  on  to  the 
last  gasp,  till  the  resistless  tide  of  revolution  sweeps  away  her 
sceptre  and  her  throne  together. 

Even  now,  look  at  England  ;  where  half  her  people  who  regu- 
larly attend  the  public  worship  of  God,  worship  in  the  ranks  of  the 
Dissenters ;  possessing  such  toleration  as  has  been,  from  time  to 
time,  wrung  from  the  hand  of  power,  yet  still  laboring  under  every 
obloquy  and  discouragement,  which  the  established  Church  is  able 
to  cast  upon  them,  and  which  the  times  allow ;  and  in  addition 
to  their  own  burdens,  compelled  to  pay  tithes  for  the  support  of 
that  very  Church-establishment,  which  spares  no  effort  to  crush 
them  to  the  dust. 

And  yet  the  vision  of  some  people  can  look  over  all  these 
things,  to  fasten  upon  the  few  transient  errors  of  their  own  Puri- 
tan Fathers  !  And  there  are  sons  of  New  England,  whose  dear- 
est privileges  are  owing,  under  God,  entirely  to  the  faith  and  toil, 
and  indescribable  sufferings  of  their  fathers  ;  who  yet  seem  to  de- 
light in  hearing  the  names  and  principles  of  those  fathers  men- 
tioned with  reproach!  The  principles  of  freedom  which  those 
fathers  struck  out  and  maintained,  the  mighty  benefits  which 
have  resulted  from  their  labors  to  their  posterity,  and  to  the  world ; 
the  forecast  and  virtue  which  laid  the  foundations  of  everything 
peculiar  in  our  American  institutions,  and  which  have  made  this 
American  people  the  freest  and  happiest  of  all  nations,  since  the 
foundation  of  the  earth ;  all  these  things  go  for  nothing  in  the 
estimation  of  these  misguided  and  degenerate  sons !  They  di- 
rect their  vision,  as  if  to  some  little  spots  on  the  glorious  sun,  and 


406  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

tell  how  that  sun  disfigures  the  Heavens,  and  how  glorious  the 
Heavens  would  be  if  that  dismal  sun  were  not  there.  They  dwell 
upon  some  idle  gossip,  some  stale  slander,  a  thousand  times  re- 
futed. They  talk  about  that  mass  of  impudent  forgeries  so  often 
set  forth,  and  so  extensively  believed,  the  "  Connecticut  Blue 
Laws ;"  just  as  though  the  code  set  forth  under  that  name  had 
once  had  a  real  existence,  as  a  part  of  the  Connecticut  laws. 
The  wonder  is  that  the  very  name  of  Blue  Laws  does  not  blis- 
ter the  tongue  of  every  Prelatist,  when  he  remembers  the  origin 
of  that  lying  history,  in  which  the  code  of  Blue  Laws  had  their 
first  introduction  to  the  world. 

VII.    COMPARATIVE  TENDENCIES  OF  PURITANISM    AND    PRELACY. 

But  we  scarcely  need  history  to  determine  the  respective  fruits 
of  Prelacy  and  Puritanism.  These  fruits  must  inevitably  result 
from  the  nature  of  the  two  systems.  On  the  one  side,  a  hier- 
archy, claiming  a  monopoly  of  all  the  covenanted  mercies  of 
God  ;  a  divine  right  to  rule  over  all  people  who  bear  allegiance 
to  Christ ;  asserting  their  authority  to  make  Canons,  and  devise 
ceremonies,  and  to  impose  the  same  by  law,  upon  all  Christ's 
people ;  forbidding  all  congregations  of  Christians  to  offer  a 
prayer  in  public,  save  according  to  a  prescribed  liturgy ;  charging 
all  Christians,  who  question  their  authority,  and  refuse  to  con- 
form to  their  ordinances,  as  schismatics  and  dissenters,  and  de- 
nouncing all  their  ministers  as  sons  of  Korah,  with  whom  it  is 
unlawful  for  a  true  Christian  to  hold  communion  in  divine 
ordinances,  or  to  join  in  public  worship.  What  toleration  can 
result  from  these  principles  as  their  natural  fruit  ?  What  tolera- 
tion did  they  yield  our  fathers  for  years  before  they  fled  to  these 
then  desolate  shores  ?  What  are  their  fruits  in  Old  England  to 
the  present  day?  What  in  Italy?  In  Spain?*  or  anywhere 
else  in  the  wide  world  ? 

On  the  other  hand,  what  is  the  Puritan  principle  ?  The  divine 
right  and  duty  of  every  man  to  go  to  the  Word  of  God  for  him- 
self;  the  Word  of  God  the  sole  standard  of  faith,  order,  and 
duty ;  the  divine  right  of  every  Christian  community  orderly  to 
associate  together  in  congregations  for  the  observance  of  the 
worship  and  ordinances  of  God,  with  no  power  anywhere  on 
earth  to  prescribe  to  them  the  manner  of  their  worship,  or  to  over- 

*  The  system  has  courage  to  speak  Sut  in  Canada.  The  present  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Bishop  of  Toronto  says  in  his  Charge  :  "  In  all  the  British  colonies,  we  [the 
Episcopal  clergy]  are  alone  entitled,  as  holding  the  divine  commission,  to  be  their 
[the  dissenters]  teachers,  guides,  and  directors  in  divine  things.  Nor  does  it  alter 
the  matter  that  they  refuse  obedience  and  resist  our  authority.  The  right  is  not 
less  ;  nor  can  we  without  sin  neglect  to  exercise  it,  whenever  it  can  be  done  with 
any  prospect  of  success."  What  Pope  ;  what  minion  of  the  Bloody  Bonner  ever 
carried  the  thtory  of  divine  right  to  persecute  farther  than  this  ? 


CONCLUSION.  407 

rule  their  own  judgment  and  conscience  ;  a  liberty  claimed,  and 
a  liberty  allowed,  to  every  man  and  to  every  congregation  of 
men  ;  a  liberty  which  none  can  deny,  with  which  none  can  in- 
terfere, without  infringing  upon  the  great  charter  granted  by  the 
Almighty  to  all  his  people,  and  without,  at  the  same  time,  im- 
piously usurping  the  prerogatives  of  Heaven. 

Is  this  a  system  of  superstition,  of  bigotry,  of  persecution,  of 
intolerance  ?  The  farthest  from  it  possible.  The  discoverers  of 
this  simple  but  sublime  system  of  religious  rights,  were — more 
than  the  Newtons — the  benefactors  of  the  world.  Like  the  great 
laws  of  nature,  this  law  is  beautiful  in  its  simplicity,  and  awful 
in  its  grandeur.  Its  first  discoverers  might  not  have  comprehend- 
ed, at  once,  all  its  length  and  breadth  :  they  may,  in  particular 
instances,  have  greatly  erred  from  its  precepts  ;  but  the  principle 
remains.  It  will  continue  to  shed  abroad  its  richer  benefits  the 
more  it  is  understood,  and  the  better  it  is  obeyed.  It  will  gradu- 
ally purge  away  the  mists  and  defilements  of  error.  The  present 
entire  equality  of  all  sects  of  worshippers,  which  characterizes  our 
American  Institutions,  was  as  sure  to  result  from  these  principles, 
as  the  sun  is  to  break  through  the  shadows  of  a  misty  morning. 

But  from  the  opposite,  the  prelatical  principle,  what  can  come  ? 
It  cannot  allow  men  freedom  to  worship  God.  It  trusts  not  its 
own  children,  but  seeks  to  bind  them  by  the  authority  of  Canons, 
and  to  fence  them  in  by  Liturgies  and  prescribed  ceremonies ; 
and  then  talks  about  the  misery  of  the  poor  people  left  with  the 
Bible  and  their  own  conscience  alone,  without  the  benefit  of  such 
authoritative  fences  and  canons !  What  can  come  from  this 
system  ?  What  has  come  of  it  ?  Too  well  have  we  seen,  as 
we  have  traced  its  course  in  the  history  of  hundreds  of  years. 

Leave  the  soul  of  man  and  the  mind  of  man  free.  Let  him 
be  responsible  for  his  faith  only  to  God.  Persecution  is  at  an 
end.  Bigotry  expires.  If  religious  principle,  and  a  regard  to 
his  eternal  interests,  cannot  keep  him  to  the  truth,  it  is  in  vain  to 
keep  him  in — like  a  being  to  whom  reason  and  conscience  are 
both  an  incumbrance — by  prelatical  prerogatives,  fences,  liturgies, 
and  ceremonial  forms. 

That  the  Puritanic  principle  is  the  principle  of  reason  and  of 
the  Word  of  God,  we  entertain  no  shadow  of  doubt ;  and  there- 
fore we  trust,  in  entire  confidence,  that  as  the  advancing  kingdom 
of  Christ  brings  the  souls  of  men  to  a  clearer  perception  of  their  re- 
sponsibities  and  rights,  the  Puritan  principle  is  destined  to  pre- 
vail. That  the  despotism  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  Hierarchies 
over  so  large  a  portion  of  Christendom,  is  destined  to  decline, 
what  Protestant  can  doubt,  who  believes  that  the  light  and  free- 
dom of  the  Gospel  are  one  day  to  fill  the  world  ?  As  little  ought 
it  to  be  doubted,  that  the  very  root  of  these  despotisms,  the  su- 


408  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

perstition  of  a  Christian  Priesthood,  and  of  authority  derived 
from  Apostolical  succession,  and  all  the  powers  claimed  by  a  hier- 
archy to  frame  riles,  and  ceremonies,  and  canons,  and  to  impose 
the  same  upon  God's  people,  are  destined  to  vanish  away.  That 
Prelacy  may  live  and  flourish  for  a  time,  no  one  ought  to  doubt, 
who  looks  at  the  causes  that  contribute  to  its  support.  The  reli- 
gion of  priestly  interventions,  of  ceremonies  and  forms,  of  grace 
conferred  by  rituals,  is  the  religion  of  human  nature.  People 
who  want  the  benefits  of  religion  on  terms  requiring  little  heart- 
work  and  little  self-denial ;  who  wish  for  nothing  that  presses 
heavily  on  the  conscience,  or  that  forbids  a  good  degree  of  con- 
formity to  the  world,  will  always  exhibit  a  tendency  to  fall  in 
with  a  religion  essentially  of  the  Prelatic  cast.  Such  a  religion 
will  of  course  be  the  religion  of  the  fashionable  and  the  gay,  the 
worldly,  and  the  ambitious.  Even  the  absurdities,  the  supersti- 
tions, and  the  abominations  of  Popery,  do  not  prevent  its  holding 
an  almost  unbroken  sway,  over  a  large  portion  of  the  cultivated 
intellect  of  the  earth.  Archbishop  Whately  has  a  work  charac- 
terized by  his  usual  vigor  and, discrimination,  entitled,  "  The  er- 
rors of  Romanism  traced  to  their  source  in  human  nature ;"  in 
which  he  shows  that  monstrous  scheme  to  be  the  result,  not  so 
much  of  the  imposture  of  a  designing  priesthood,  as  of  a  sin- 
loving,  God-hating,  human  nature;  its  dislike  of  a  spiritual  reli- 
gion, and  its  natural  tendency  to  resort  to  priestly  offices,  as  an 
easier  mode  of  salvation ;  less  troublesome  to  the  conscience,  less 
irksome  to  a  heart  that  loves  the  indulgence  of  sin,  than  the  spir- 
itual religion  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  but  natural,  that 
wherever  the  absurdities  of  Popery  are  seen  to  be  too  monstrous, 
the  same  corrupt  human  nature  should  seek  a  religion  of  the 
same  species,  but  a  religion  more  decent  in  some  of  its  details. 
Such  is  the  system  of  Puseyism,  and  the  system  of  High  Church 
Prelacy ;  and  he  who  reads  the  work  of  Archbishop  Whately, 
will  be  at  no  loss  to  account  for  the  rapidity  with  which  Pusey- 
ism has  swept  over  so  large  a  portion  of  the  Episcopal  Church. 
The  same  causes  will  doubtless  continue  to  swell  the  ranks 
of  the  votaries  of  that  system.  Argument  and  light  have  lit- 
tle intrinsic  power,  where  men  by  nature  love  darkness  rather 
than  light.  The  Evangelical  party  have  the  Gospel  on  their 
side  ;  Puseyism  has  human  nature  and  the  offices  of  the  Church. 
While  human  nature  remains  corrupt,  its  instinctive  tendencies 
are  either  wholly  to  reject  the  Gospel,  or  to  deny  its  eternal  retri- 
butions, or  to  contrive  a  religion  of  forms  and  priestly  interven- 
tions ;  and  he  will  find  himself  mistaken,  who  thinks  that  be- 
cause this  last  scheme  is  based  on  palpable  error,  it  will  not, 
therefore,  long  contrive  to  have  its  votaries.  So  long  as  men 
continue  careless,  such  a  religion  will  be  popular ;  but  when  the 


COMPARATIVE  TENDENCIES.  409 

Spirit  of  God  descends  in  his  might,  to  convince  the  world  of  sin, 
of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment  to  come,  then  men  will  flee 
from  these  refuges  of  lies,  and  earnestly  inquire  what  they  shall 
do  to  be  saved.  The  religion  of  salvation  by  priestly  interven- 
tions is  destined  finally  to  vanish  away ;  and  light,  and  liberty, 
and  salvation,  to  fill  the  earth. 

To  the  advancement  of  pure  religious  truth,  as  well  as  of  just 
principles  of  freedom,  the  labors  of  the  Puritans  have,  next  to 
the  Reformation,  contributed  more  than  anything  else  since  the 
labors  of  the  Apostles.  Their  labors  are  destined  to  form  one  of 
the  great  eras  in  the  history  of  man. 

CONCLUSION. 

And  now  our  work  is  done.  We  have  seen  our  fathers  in 
their  conflicts  ;  we  have  visited  them  in  their  prisons  ;  we  have 
traced  them  in  their  wanderings,  and  come  with  them  to  their' 
first  rude  dwellings  in  the  wilderness.  We  have  looked  at  the 
foundations  rising  under  their  hands.  In  two  hundred  years, 
the  wilderness  is  converted  into  a  fair  and  fruitful  field.  In  ail 
time,  the  sun  never  before  shone  on  a  people  so  free,  and  blessed 
so  abundantly  with  all  the  elements  of  human  happiness.  Save 
for  the  principles  which  our  Puritan  fathers  maintained  at  every 
hazard  and  every  sacrifice,  all  these  fair  fruits  of  freedom  and  of 
religion  would  never  have  been. 

We  have  shown  these  principles  of  the  Puritans  to  be  based 
on  fundamental  truths — truths  which  are  eternal  in  their  nature, 
and  which  can  never  cease  to  be  of  unspeakable  importance  to 
the  best  interests  of  mankind. 

These  were  the  principles  of  men  who  feared  God :  the  prin- 
ciples of  sober,  intelligent,  and  steadfast  men  :  and  by  successive 
generations  of  such  men,  and  such  alone,  are  these  principles  to 
be  perpetuated  in  the  world.  The  time  is  coming  when  the 
principles  and  institutions  of  our  Puritan  fathers  will  be  appre- 
ciated in  this  land,  and  when  their  influence  will  be  felt  all  over 
the  globe.  We  are  quite  willing  to  point  to  their  results  in 
New  England,  and  to  ask  whether  it  would  be'any  loss  to  man- 
kind, should  such  principles  and  institutions  be  extended 
throughout  the  world. 

We  owe  something  to  these  principles.  We  owe  everlasting 
thanks  to  God,  that  he  has  made  us  the  descendants  of  such 
ancestors,  and  allowed  us  to  enter  into  their  labors.  May  it 
never  be  said  that  we  forsook  the  principles  of  our  fathers,  or 
our  fathers'  God.  They  would  be  the  first  of  all  to  rise  up  and 
condemn  us,  if,  pretending  to  prize  their  principles,  we  should 
fail  in  that  which  was  the  main  end  and  crown  of  all  their  in- 


410  THE  PURITANS  AND  THEIR  PRINCIPLES. 

stitutions — piety  to  God,  and  a  living,  fruitful,  faith  in  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ. 

The  conflict  of  human  opinions  and  human  principles  will 
soon  be  over.  All  human  institutions,  and  all  human  taber- 
nacles of  worship,  are  soon  to  vanish  away.  If  our  privileges 
and  institutions  contribute  to  our  salvation,  and  to  make  us 
meet  for  the  inheritance  of  the  saints  in  light,  this  is  the  fruit 
most  of  all  to  be  desired.  May  God  make  them  such  to  us, 
and  preserve  them  to  our  children  and  to  our  children's  chil- 
dren, to  the  end  of  time. 


APPENDIX. 


"PURITANISM,  BY  T.  W.  COIT." 

JUST  before  this  work  was  ready  for  the  press,  there  appeared  a  work  entitled 
"  PURITANISM,  OR,  A  CHURCHMAN'S  DEFENCE  AGAINST  ITS  ASPERSIONS.  BY 
THOMAS  W.  COIT,  D.D.,  Rector  of  Trinity  Church,  New  Rochelle,  N.  Y.,  and  a 
member  of  the  New  York  Historical  Society." 

As  in  duty  bound,  I  hastened  to  procure  the  work,  that  I  might  avail  myself 
of  whatever  additional  light  it  might  throw  upon  the  subject. 

The  honorary  titles  appended  to  the  name  of  the  author  of  the  work 
("D.D.,  Member  of  the  New  York  Historical  Society")  led  me  to  expect  some- 
thing. I  turned  to  its  (what  shall  I  call  it  ?)  Ante-Preface ;  in  which,  in  a 
quotation  from  Mather,  the  author  anticipates  the  "  furious  tempest, — a  tem- 
pest of  rain,  hail,  and  horrid  thunder- claps,"  which  his  work  is  about  to  raise. 
Well,  thought  I,  the  good  man  expects,  at  the  least,  to  make  a  noise  in  the 
world. 

ORIGIN    OF  THE  WORK. 

I  turned  to  the  Preface,  in  which  I  found  that  the  work  was  prepared  at  the 
special  call  of  "  several  of  the  Bishops,  and  a  large  number  of  the  Clergy," 
and  that  this  was  "  not  the  first,  nor  the  twentieth  time,  that  he  had  been 
approached  on  the  subject."  It  seems  that  the  author  had  tried  his  hand  at 
the  same  sort  of  labor,  ten  years  before,  in  a  series  of  letters  in  the  Church- 
man :  but  the  recollection  of  the  "  rain,  hail,  and  horrid  thunder-claps,"  which 
had  been  "  poured  upon  him,"  "  determined  him  never  to  resume,  on  his  indi- 
vidual responsibility."  "  Several  of  the  Bishops,  and  a  large  number  of  the 
clergy,"  now  approached  him,  "  willing  to  share  with  him  the  responsibility," 
"  by  giving  their  signatures ;"  and  under  this  high  authority,  he  girds  himself 
for  the  work.  "  But  another  work,  which,"  says  he,  "  the  Church  was 
pleased  to  ask  of  me,  interfered  (the  editing  of  a  Standard  Prayer-Book)." 
Accordingly,  as  soon  as  the  Prayer-Book  is  published,  in  obedience  to  this 
new  call  of  the  Church,  he  takes  the  Puritans  in  hand.  I  confess,  that  after 
all  this  note  of  preparation,  I  did  expect  something, — that  a  decent  edifice,  at 
least,  should  follow  so  notable  a  porch. 


412 


REVIEW. 


GENERAL  FEATURES  OF  THE  WORK. 


But  on  reading  the  book,  what  did  I  find  ?  A  manful  discussion  of  the 
great  principles  for  which  the  Puritans  contended  ?  A  denial  of  the  persecu- 
tions inflicted  upon  them  by  the  government  and  Church  of  England  ?  A  vin- 
dication of  the  principles  on  which  the  Church  of  England  claimed  a  right  to 
persecute ;  i.  e.,  to  make  canons  for  the  use  of  ceremonies,  and  to  impose  the 
same  by  law  ?  Nothing  like  it.  He  wanders  over  the  whole  history,  as  if 
utterly  unconscious  that  any  principles  at  all  are  at  stake.  He  roams  over 
those  most  stirring  times  of  the  whole  range  of  English  history, — the  period 
more  prodigal  in  genius,  in  intellectual  and  moral  greatness,  more  pregnant 
with  great  events,  and  more  productive  of  great  and  glorious  results,  more  fruit- 
ful in  instructive  lessons  of  history,  than  any  other  period  in  the  whole  unin- 
spired history  of  man.  But  what  lessons  of  truth ;  what  maxims  of  political 
wisdom  ;  what  principles  of  civil  or  religious  freedom,  does  he  bring  forth  to 
light  ?  Just  none  at  all.  He  is  all  unconscious  of  the  great  events  transpiring 
around  him.  He  is  unable  to  comprehend  the  tremendous  results  depending — 
of  freedom  or  of  despotism,  of  truth  or  superstition,  of  light  or*of  darkness, — 
to  the  English  nation,  and  through  them,  to  so  large  a  portion  of  the  family  of 
man.  He  cannot  see  what  makes  these  times  stormy.  He  cannot  comprehend 
what  has  wakened  up  so  many  minds  to  such  prodigious  efforts  of  genius ; 
and  what  has  roused  them  to  such  dauntless  courage,  and  self-sacrificing  endur- 
ance. Oh,  no ;  he  cannot  comprehend  it :  in  his  view,  this  is  all  wilfulness, 
or  money-making,  or  at  the  utmost,  a  mere  squabble  for  political  power.  He 
goes  through  the  field,  as  has  been  well  expressed,  "  mousing"  after  the  faults, 
or  follies,  or  inconsistencies  of  the  great  actors  in  those  events  ;  and  he  can  see 
nothing  else. 

DESIGN   OF   THE  WORK. 

But  I  forget :  it  was  to  the  work  of  mousing,  that  he  was  specially  called 
by  the  Bishops  and  clergy ;  who  it  seems  had  known  their  man.  It  was  not 
to  discuss  any  great  principles ;  not  to  act  the  part  of  a  fair  and  generous  his- 
torian, that  "  The  Church"  had  called  the  Dr.  into  the  field :  Oh,  no,  but 
in  his  own  account  of  the  matter, — "  to  tell  unwelcome  truths  concerning 
our  opponents" — "in  defence  of  the  Church."  So  then,  it  is  not  history,  no, 
nor  discussion,  that  the  Bishops  and  clergy  ask  of  Dr.  Coit ;  but  to  rake  in 
these  old  kennels,  and  throw  filth  ;  to  blacken  the  characters  (not  controvert 
the  principles)  of  the  Puritan  founders  of  New  England  !*  Dr.  Coit  himself, 

*  "  Years  ago,  says  Dr.  Coit  (p.  276),  "  I  awakened  the  apprehension  of  some  of 
my  fellow-churchmen,  lest  I  should  tell  too  much  for  my  brethren,  and  too  much 
against  their  enemies."  *  *  *  "  Doubtless,  those  who  are  undeservedly  tender  of 
Puritan  reputation,  would  have  these  sketches  inscribed  on  silken  velvet.  Frater- 
nal condolence !  verily  it  will  have  its  reward.  Its  commiserated  objects  will 
grasp  any  concession  with  characteristic  avidity,  trample  it  under  their  feet,  and 
turning  again  rend  the  giver.  I  know  the  mode  of  requital  by  melancholy  experi- 
ence." *  *  *  "  I  am  under  small  obligations  to  extenuate,"  *  *  *  "  I  would  much 
rather  give  my  '  two  mites'  unalloyed  into  the  treasury  of  their  praise,  who  toiled 


REVIEW.  413 

confesses,  p.  13,  that  he  "at  first  acted"  under  "provocation;"  and  "that  "a 
fresh  and  bitterer  provocation  induced  him  to  continue  writing."  Like  the  old 
Athenian,  who  was  tired  of  always  hearing  Aristides  called  the  just,  Dr.  Coit 
had  long  been  indignant  at  bearing  "  the  infliction"  of  "  harangues"  (p.  22), 
about  Plymouth  Rock,  and  the  Pilgrim  Fathers ;  and  so  he  is  determined 
never  to  cease  throwing  javelins  ( if,  at  this  distance,  I  can  remember  rightly 
a  sentence  in  his  original  letters  in  the  Churchman)  "  as  long  as  an  eye  can 
point,  or  an  arm  can  hurl."  But  let  us  come  to 

THE    MAIN    POINT. 

The  main  point  in  Dr.  Coifs  book,  is  to  inquire  "  simply  and  plainly  why 
did  the  Puritans  come  to  these  shores  ?  Did  they  abandon  England  solely  or 
even  principally  on  account  of  religious  considerations?"  (p.  16.)  "My 
answer,"  he  says,  "  is  an  immediate  negative." 

To  this  inquiry  he  is  induced  under  "  provocation"  (p.  13).  And  this  pro- 
vocation was  that,  "  the  celebrity  of  the  Plymouth  Rock  heroes  is  expatiated 
on  year  by  year"  (p.  15).  "  Why  ?"  Oh  !  because — "  they  were  persecuted" — 
"  they  fled  from  persecution" — "  they  came  in  suffering  and  poverty  to  a  deso- 
late shore  ;" — "  because  they  were  striving  to  escape  from  the  tyranny  of 
unjust  kings,  and  the  domination  of  lords  spiritual," — "  and  were  willing  to 
endure  all  this,  that  they  might  throw  off  the  yoke  of  despotism,  and  cast  aside 
the  mummeries  of  superstition. — " 

Here  he  demands,  "  Is  the  tyranny  by  which  public  opinion  is  swayed — the 
yoke  under  which  it  is  bowed — the  mummery  by  which  it  is  worked,  never  to 
cease  ?"  This  "  tyranny"  of  "  public  opinion,"  he  is  now  about  to  overthrow. 

HE    MORE    PRECISELY  DEFINES    HIS    POSITION. 

On  p.  73,  he  more  precisely  lays  down  his  great  position  :  "  The  represen- 
tation which  depicts  the  Puritans  as  having  '  transported'  (unlucky  phrase  !) 
themselves  for  a  purely  religious  cause,  is  one  which,  with  New  England  sturdi- 
ness,  I  must  positively  deny,  and  continue  to  deny  till  I  can  read  history  back- 
end  sacrificed  and  died  in  and/or  the  fiftth  which  my  heart  cherishes,  and  my  mind 
reveres."  "  And  of  the  Church  to  which  they  cling  with  such  firm  zeal,  would  I 
exclaim  in  the  beautiful  apostrophe  of  the  dying  Tobit  (Tobit  xiii.  14),"  &c. 

He  fully  carries  out  his  plan  of  saying  nothing  in  favor  of  the  Puritans.  In  his 
"  CONCLUSION"  (p,  247),  he  says,  "  And  now,  I  suppose  the  question  will  be  asked, 
Having  said  all  which  one  of  the  '  Malignant  Party'  can  say  to  disparage  the  Puri- 
tans, are  you  going  to  part  with  them,  and  utter  no  words  in  their  praise  ? 

"  And  my  reply  will  be  shorter,  much  shorter,  than  many  expect."  First,  he  de- 
clares that  he  has  praised  the  Huguenots,  Gov.  Winthrop,  and  Roger  Williams. 
In  the  second  place,  he  says,  "  I  have  as  full  faith  in  the  piety,  in  the  honesty,  and 
in  the  Protestantism  of  AP.  LAUD,  &c."  And  in  case  the  descendants  of  the 
Puritans  shall  ever  honor  him,  "  the  example,"  he  says,  "  may  so  captivate  me  that 
I  may  forget  it  is  my  duty  to  silence  Puritan  clamors,  by  enumerating  Puritan  faults." 
So  ends  his  book.  He  has  stuck  manfully— through  thick  and  thin,  to  his  design  ; 
to  blacken  the  character  of  the  Puritans,  and  to  be  careful  to  concede  nothing  to 
their  praise. 


414  REVIEW. 

wards."  "  My  fellow-churchmen,  I  am  equally  positive,  will  give  me  a  hearty 
Amen."  He  does  well  to  call  the  attempt  to  substantiate  such  a  denial,  an 
"  adventure."  It  is  so  indeed ;  and  very  much  like  the  adventure  of  Don 
Quixote  with  the  windmills,— thus  to  fly  in  the  face  of  the  amplest  and  most 
undeniable  documents  of  the  times,  as  well  as  of  the  concurrent  and  settled 
testimony  of  all1  received  history.  It  is,  indeed,  an  adventure,  and  altogether 
Quixotic, — on  the  strength  of  such  nameless  or  obsolete  histories  as  he 
adduces — by  the  revival  of  slanders  which  gained  no  credit  in  their  day,  and 
which  were  therefore  consigned  to  oblivion, — and  upon  the  strength  of  such 
arguments  as  Dr.  Coit  advances, — to  "  deny,"  that  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  of 
New  England  came  to  this  country,  "  solely,  or  even  principally  for  a  religious 
cause." 

Dr.  Coit,  however,  nothing  daunted,  having  received  in  anticipation  the 
"  Amen"  of  his  "  fellow-churchmen,"  further  strengthens  himself  for  his  ad- 
venture by  a  quotation  from  the  Apocrypha :  "  Strive  for  the  truth  unto 
death,  and  the  Lord  shall  fight  for  thee."— Ecclus.  iv.  28.  "  It  speaks  the  sense 
of  inspiration,  if  not  its  words,"  says  Dr.  Coit ;  "  and  I  can  act  on  it  with 
uplifting  confidence  in  my  brethren,  and  of  my  cause."  (He  has  not  only  the 
anticipated  "  Amen"  of  his  "  fellow-churchmen,"  but  what  is  better,  he  has  the 
sign  manual  of  several  of  the  Bishops  and  many  of  the  clergy.  He  is  the 
champion  specially  called  to  this  work  by  the  Church  ;  and  why  should  he  not 
be  bold  ?) 

HE   PREPARES    TO   MAKE   HIS   ONSET. 

Thus  fortified,  and  with  these  invocations,  this  historical  Don  Quixote  rushes 
on  the  windmills.  He  adopts  "  good  old  Owen  Felltham's  definition  of  a  Puri- 
tan"— CHURCH-REBEL,  p.  74.  "They  deserted  England,"  says  he,  "because 
this  ascendency  ['  in  Church  and  State ']  was  beyond  their  control." — "  True, 
they  conjured  up  a  storm  and  went  away  in  the  midst  of  it."—  "  They  were 
compelled  to  retreat." — "  Yes,  they  sailed  for  Holland." — "  There  they  were 
tolerated,  indeed,  but  watched." — "  Their  smothered  ambition  at  last  breaks 
out ;  and  we  find  them  pushing  for  a  th^itre,  where  they  might  be  free  from 
watching,  and  wield  the  rod  of  empire,  with  none  to  make  afraid." — "  But, 
after  all,  they  were  too  wary  to  be  content  with  a  skeleton  form  of  government, 
not  clothed  upon  with  wholesome  muscle,  embraced  with  nerve  and  sinew." — 
"  They  never  braved  a  billow  till  they  had  attempted  to  drive  a  favorable  bar- 
gain with  a  company  of  merchants."  "  They  and  their  emissaries  went  to 
and  fro,  like  the  raven,  upon  the  waters,  till  they  obtained,  under  sign  and  seal, 
a  CHARTER,  whose  munificent  compass  and  unqualified  endowments,  rivalled, 
in  their  construction  of  it,  the  powers  of  Parliament,  and  every  court  within 
the  realm." — "  And  being  such,  and  attempting  such  things  in  England,  and 
failing  there — failing,  too,  in  their  fond  schemes  in  Holland — then  compacting 
with  an  avowed  band  of  money-getters,  and  fortified  by  this  ALL-EMBRACING 
CHARTER,  they  set  up  their  standard  on  this  distant  shore  :  and  all  this  for 
*  a  religious  cause,'  "  "  They  profess  freely,  that  they  carne  here  to  '  win  the 
natives  of  the  country  to  the  knowledge  and  obedience  of  the  only  true  God 


REVIEW.  415 

and  Saviour  of  Mankind'  (SEE  THE  CHARTER),  and  all  this  for  *  a  purely  religious 
cause.* "  In  this  strain  of  ribaldry  he  continues  from  page  to  page  ;  winding 
up  each  of  his  successive  paragraphs  of  invective  with  the  repeated  sneer,  "  And 
all  for  a  religious  cause !" — "  They  tolerated  such  grossness  in  the  pulpit  and 
in  the  press,"  "  as  might  disgrace  a  bar-room,  and  all  this  for  a  purely  religious 
cause  !"* 

THE   ARRAY   OF   HIS   ANTAGONISTS. 

And  now  Dr.  Coit  arranges  some  select  specimens  of  the  common  historical 
statements  which  he  is  about  to  assail :  "  Says  John  Norton,  in  1657,  with  a 
dogmatism  inherent  in  his  race,  *  It  concerns  New  England  always  to  remem- 
ber, that  originally,  they  are  a  plantation  religious,  and  not  a  plantation  of 
trade.' " — "  Increase  Mather  hath  this :  '  It  was  with  regard  to  Church  order  and 
discipline  that  the  good  old  Puritan  Non-Conformists  transported  themselves 
and  their  families  over  the  vast  ocean  to  the  going  down  of  the  sun.'  " — "  Says 
Judge  Story,  *  The  Puritans,  persecuted  at  home,  and  groaning  under  the  weight 
of  spiritual  bondage,  cast  a  longing  eye  toward  America,  as  an  ultimate  retreat 
for  themselves  and  their  children.'" 

"Says  a  Unitarian' minister  (Mr.  Francis),  'The  enterprise  was,  strictly 
speaking,  an  ecclesiastical  concern.'" 

"  And  lastly,  says  even  a  Baptist  (Dr.  Wmjland),  *  The  Puritans,  A  TITLE  OF 
INTELLECTUAL  AS  WELL  AS  OF  MORAL  NOBILITY,  left  all  the  endearments  of 
home /or  a  purely  religious  cause.' " 

*  Strange  laws  of  association  seem  to  reign  in  Dr.  Coit's  mind.  He  cannot  close 
this  tirade  against  the  Pilgrims  without  running  into  his  favorite  theme,  the  eulogy 
of  Archbishop  Laud;  one  would  think,  from  the  frequency  with  which  he  intro- 
duces this  name,  that  the  canonization  of  Laud  was  the  great  collateral  design  of 
this  book.  It  is  his  favorite  theme.  To  this  retreat  he  constantly  withdraws  to 
breathe  himself,  after  spending  his  fury  upon  the  Puritans.  Ever  and  anon  the 
"  murdered  prelate  and  his  still  assassinated  memory"  (p.  122),  stalk  forth  to  view 
throughout  the  book.  The  eulogy  on  p.  78,  of  Dr.  Coifs  book,  is  a  curiosity  worth 
transcribing :  "  I  well  know  that  my  advocacy  of  this  ill-omened  name  [Laud],  how 
slight  soever,  will  be  atrocious  guilt  before  that  livid  implacability,  which  will  never 
admit  that  its  offences  against  man,  have  to  man  been  deeply  atoned  for,  by  a  trial, 
to  which  the  rack  were  a  mercy,  and  by  death  (earth's  latest  boon  to  him)  under 
the  executioner's  axe.  But  I  feel  as  it  were  anything  but  sin  to  defend  him,  (noble 
defender  as  he  was  of  the  Protestant  faith,  &c.)  when,  even  at  this  late  day,  I  dis- 
cover a  very  positive  assertor,  declaring  that  "  but  for  the  Puritans,  England  had 
never  become  Protestant."  [Bancroft.]  "  Venerable,  but,  alas,  Episcopal  Lambeth ! 
the  blood  of  two  of  your  archbishops,  martyred  by  Romanists  and  by  Puritans,  pro- 
claims who  were  your  worst  enemies,  and  how  earnestly  you  have  contended  for 
the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  by  the  'armor  of  righteousness  ON  THE 
RIGHT  HAND  AND  ON  THE  LEFT.'"  As  Laud  fell  in  attempting  to  make  the  king 
an  absolute  despot,  and  in  endeavoring  to  establish,  practically,  as  well  as  theoreti- 
cally, the  dogma  of  passive  obedience  and  non-resistance,  Dr.  Coit  should  seem 
bound  to  tell  us,  whether  he  thinks  these  among  the  doctrines  once  delivered  to  the 
saints ;  and  whether  he  deems  it  "  the  armor  of  righteousness,"  to  gird  one's  self 
with  panoply  for  the  maintenance  of  such  tenets. 


416  REVIEW. 

This  is  the  array  of  authorities  which  Mr.  Coit  himself  sets  up  as  the  mark 
of  his  point — blank  contradictions. 

Now,  before  examining  Dr.  Coit's  authorities,  we  may  venture  to  remark, 
that  here  is  a  combination  of  knowledge,  and  talent,  and  wreight  of  character 
in  the  very  opponents  against  which  he  has  set  himself  in  battle  array,  enough 
to  warn  him  of  the  necessity  of  seeing  that  his  steed  be  good,  and  his  blade 
true  steel,  before  he  ventures  the  onset.  He  needs  the  most  indubitable  facts, 
and  the  best  of  arguments,  to  set  aside  the  concurrent  testimony  of  whole  gene- 
rations of  such  men  as  he  has  here  attempted  to  contradict.  John  Norton  was 
one  of  the  early  Massachusetts  colonists ;  he  knew,  and  he  addressed  those 
who  knew,  for  what  reason  they  left  their  homes.  They  did  not  contradict 
him ;  but  lived  and  died  in  the  full  persuasion,  that  they  came  from  their  coun- 
try, in  flight  from  persecution,  and  for  freedom  to  worship  God.  No  lesson 
was  more  thoroughly  instilled  into  the  minds  of  their  children.  The  sermons, 
letters,  histories,  of  that  generation,  are  full  of  this  fact.  They  contradict  the 
aspersers  of  their  character,  who  fabricate  the  slanders  which  Dr.  Coit  has  with 
so  much  pains  raked  from  the  dust  of  oblivion,  to  which  the  verdict  of  the 
world  had  consigned  them. 

Increase  Mather,  too,  was  but  a  step  distant  from  the  transactions  which  he 
recorded,  and  could  not  be  mistaken  with  regard  to  the  considerations  which 
brought  the  Puritans  to  these  shores. 

Judge  Story,  too,  the  profoundest  jurist  of  his  age,  inferior  to  none  in  a  tho- 
rough acquaintance  with  the  early  history  of  his  native  land,  and  of  integrity 
beyond  reproach  :  one  would  think  that  he  was  no  mean  authority  on  a  matter 
of  history  so  easily  ascertained. 

And  then,  Dr.  Wayland,  who  can  accuse  him  of  ignorance  ?  What  well-in- 
formed American  has  not  been  delighted  with  the  productions  of  his  genius, 
admired  the  profoundness  of  his  views,  and  revered  him  as  one  of  the  deepest 
and  most  accurate  thinkers  of  the  age  ?  One  would  suppose  that  such  an  en- 
comium as  he  has  passed  upon  the  Puritan  founders  of  New  England,  is  entitled 
to  some  little  weight.  And  Dr.  Coit  seems  to  wonder  that  such  a  testimony 
should  be  borne,  "  even  "  by  a  "  Baptist ;"  thus  acknowledging  that  Dr.  Way- 
land  speaks  under  no  improper  bias.  Truly,  Dr.  Coit  needs  well  "  his  adaman- 
tine coat  girt  well,"  for  such  an  encounter. 

THE   ENCOUNTER. 

Having  witnessed  the  array,  let  us  now  observe  the  encounter.  This  con- 
current testimony  concerning  the  motives  that  brought  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  to 
these  shores,  Dr.  Coit  attempts  to  meet  by  arguments  drawn  from  AUTHORITIES 
and  FACTS.  Let  us  examine  them. 

I.  His  AUTHORITIES. — "  My  answer,"  says  he,  "  is  an  immediate  negative  ; 
and  I  think  it  can  easily  be  made  out  from  a  SINGLE  WORK  I  have  at  hand,  and 
might  as  well,  or  better,  be  from  many  others,  had  I  at  this  moment  access  to 
them."  This  "  single  work  "  figures  largely  on  his  pages,  and  is  his  great  gun 
— his  "  Peace-Maker" — among  his  other  authorities.  Listen  to  its  description : 
"  The  work  alluded  to,  is  entitled, '  An  account  of  the  European  settlements  in 


REVIEW.  417 

America,  in  six  parts.     London:  1757,  2  vols.,  8vo,'"     This  is  Dr.  Coit's 
great  authority.     And  what  is  this  authority  ? 

1 .  It  comes  to  us  without  a  name  ;  at  least,  Dr.  Coit  does  not  give  us  the  name 
of  its  author,  or  any  vouchers  for  its  character  or  authenticity. 

2.  Its  date  is  1757  ;  just  one  hundred  and  thirty  years  too  late  to  be  of  any 
authority  at  all. 

3.  Dr.  Coit  tells  us  that  it  is  a  "  rare"  work  :  prima  facie  evidence  that  it 
has  for  one  hundred  and  thirty  years  been  generally  considered  a  worthless 
one. 

4.  The  quotations  adduced  by  Dr.  Coit  bear  the  clearest  and  most  demon- 
strable evidences  either  of  error  or  of  falsehood,  with  regard  to  the  plainest  mat- 
ters of  fact :  as  I  shall  presently  show,  under  the  next  head. 

And  this  is  the  authority  on  which  Dr.  Coit  ventures  to  put  forth  his  denial 
of  the  unanimous  declarations  of  the  actors  of  those  times,  together  with  the 
concurrent  testimony  of  all  received  history  !  On  such  authority  as  this,  he 
rakes  up  old  and  thrice-refuted  slanders  against  the  Puritans  !  With  "  uplift- 
ing confidence  "  in  his  "  fellow-churchmen  " — in  certain  expectation  of  their 
approving  "  Amen,"  he  delves  into  the  neglected  rubbish,  but  declares,  that  as 
to  "  those  without,"  he  must  "  expect  no  quarter  for  rousing/acfc  from  a  sleep 
which  they  had  fain  hoped  to  make  eternal."  "  My  FACTS  will  live,"  quoth 
Dr.  Coit,  "  even  though  I  should  be  *  rhetorically  crucified.' " 

I  come,  then,  — 

II.  To  HIS  FACTS. — Not  to  make  too  long  a  story,  by  stopping  to  castigate 
a  thousand  and  one  of  his  statements,  in  minor  things,  which,  in  my  view, 
are  equally  deserving  of  castigation,  I  come  at  once  to  the  main  prop  and  pillar 
of  his  entire  proof  that  the  Pilgrims  came  to  America,  not  from  religious  con- 
siderations. I  refer  to  what  Dr.  Coit  alleges  to  be  the  facts  in  the  matter  of 
the  CHARTER,  which  he  represents  the  Pilgrims  as  bringing  with  them  from 
Holland  to  America ;  and  which,  he  argues,  contains  the  prime  moving  cause 
that  brought  them  hither. 

"Now,"  says  Dr.  Coit  (p.  16),  "if  they  merely  wanted  freedom  of  con- 
science, they  had  it  IN  HOLLAND,  ex-abundanti."  *  *  *  "  And,  moreover, 
as  their  CHARTER  for  a  settlement  in  America,  which  they  had  wit  or  influence 
to  obtain,  even  when  they  had  left  England,  as  THIS  CHARTER  shows,"  &c. — 
"  These  formidable  denouncers"  *  *  "took  precious  good  care  that  THIS 
CHARTER  should  cover  the  exclusive  trade,"  "  from  Nova  Scotia  to  the  south- 
ern parts  of  Carolina,"  "  and,"  "  that  it  should  guarantee  '  the  entire  property 
of  the  soil  besides.'"  ("  See  vol.  ii.,  138,  of  the  work  above,") — [the  old 
authority  of  1757,  2  vols.  8vo.,  which  he  had  already  twice  quoted  in  tfyis 
connection — thus,  "It  states  unequivocally,  vol.  ii.,  137,  138," — "As  our 
author  affirms  with  unquestionable  truth."]  "  Nay,"  continues  Dr.  Coit, 
"  as  this  same  work  shows  (p.  140),  '  the  then  profitable  trade  of  furs 
and  skins,'  and  the  «  fisheries,'  induced  not  a  few,.  *  uneasy  at  home  upon  a  reli- 
gious account,'  to  go  where  they  might  enjoy  the  valuable  opinion  of  free 
thought,  and  the  invaluable  one  of  making  money  a  little  faster." 

On  pp.  74  and  75,  as  I  have  already  quoted,  he  recurs  to  the  same  subject 
again  :  "  They  were  compelled  to  retreat — yes,  and  they  sailed  for  Holland" 
27 


418  REVIEW. 

*  *  *  "  There  they  were  tolerated  indeed,  but  watched,"  "  says  the  philo- 
sophical and  impartial  author  of  '  European  Settlements,'  whose  work  has  been 
already  quoted" — [the  old  nameless  author  of  1757,  2  vols.  8vo.].  "  Eleven 
long  tedious  years "  were  quite  enough  to  make  them  '  devoutly  tired  of  the 
indolent  security  of  their  sanctuary." — "  Their  smothered  ambition  at  last 
breaks  out ;  and  we  find  them  pushing  for  a  theatre  where  they  might  be  free 
from  watching." — "  They  and  their  emissaries  went  to  and  fro,  like  the  raven 
upon  the  waters,  till  they  obtained  under  sign  and  seal,  a  CHARTER,  whose  mu- 
nificent compass  rivalled,  in  their  construction  of  it,  the  powers  of  Parliament, 
and  every  court  within  the  realm." — "  And  being  such,  and  attempting  such 
4hings  in  England,  and  failing  there — failing,  too,  in  their  fond  schemes  in  Hol- 
land— then  compacting  with  an  avowed  band  of  money-getters,  and  fortified  by 
this  all-embracing  CHARTER,  they  set  up  their  standard  on  this  distant  shore." 

I  have  made  these  quotations  so  long,  for  the  purpose  of  showing  indubita- 
bly, what  it  is  that  he  declares,  viz. :  that  these  Pilgrims  who  went  to  Holland, 
"  after  they  had  left  England,"  and  before  they  sailed  for  America — "fortified 
themselves  by  such  an  ALL-EMBRACING  CHARTER,"  whose  munificent  compass 
"  rivalled,  in  their  construction  of  it,  the  powers  of  Parliament,  and  every  court 
within  the  realm." 

From  these  "  FACTS,"  thus  substantiated  by  numerous  appeals  to  volume  and 
page  of  .his  nameless  old  author  of  "  1757,  2  vols.  8vo.,"  he  argues  that  the 
Pilgrims  came  from  no  religious  considerations,  but  from  motives  of  simple 
ambition  and  avarice — mere  adventurers  in  a  paltry  speculation  in  furs  and 
fish.* 

Fortified  by  this  all-embracing  CHARTER,  conveying  an  exclusive  title  to  the 
soil,  and  an  exclusive  trade  "  from  Nova  Scotia  to  the  south  parts  of  Carolina," 
after  eleven  tedious  years,  these  Pilgrims  in  Holland,  "  hoist  the  mainsail  to 
the  wind,"  "  and  steer  for  a  land  where  they  may  be  unrivalled  and  supreme." 
"  Verily,  this  is  a  plain  case,  and  the  whole  of  it,"  quoth  Dr.  Coit. 

Now,  what  becomes  of  this  great  <(fact"  about  the  *•  Charter"  upon  which 
Dr.  Coit  rests  the  main  pillar  of  his  argument — if  it  shall  turn  out  that  the  Ply- 
mouth Colony  never  had  any  such  charter  as  Dr.  Coit  describes ;  and  that  they 

*  Hear  his  conclusion  in  his  own  words  (p.  18) :"  Such  evidence  "  (of  which  the 
FACTS  about  the  CHARTER  constitute  the  main  pillar) — "  Such  evidence  (and  it 
might  be  piled  up  in  heaps,  if  necessary)  establishes  incontestably  the  FACT,  that 
persecution  for  religious  opinions  never  drove  the  Puritans  from  home,  to  seek  the 
inhospitable  shelter  of  a  howling  wilderness.  They  might  have  had  comfortable 
homes  by  good  Dutch  peat-fires,  and  lived  and  died  unmolested  and  unfearing  :  al- 
though, perhaps,  with  less  stock  at  the  banker's  than  '  exclusive  trade '  in  furs  and 
fisheries  might  secure.  But  they  wanted  a  little  more  notoriety,  a  little  more  power, 
a  little  more  money.  They  who  wielded  the  government  of  England,  and  enjoyed 
its  offices,  were  Episcopalians  ;  those  who  were  at  the  helm  in  Holland  were  Pres- 
byterians." *  *  "  The  ascendency  in  Holland  would  be  as  hard  to  gain  as  the 
ascendency  at  home  (I  mean  the  ascendency  in  politics,  money-making  and  reli- 
gion); and  so  nothing  remained  but  to  '  hoist  the  mainsail  to  the  wind 'and  to 
<steer  for  a  land  where  they  might  be  unrivalled  and  supreme  !"— "  Verily,  this  is  a 
plain  case,  and  the  whole  of  it." 


REVIEW.  419 

sailed  from  Holland  without  any  charter  at  all  ?  Such  was  the  fact ;  none  of 
the  New  England  colonies  ever  had  any  such  charter  ;*  and  the  Plymouth 
colonists  came  to  this  country  without  any  charter  at  all.  What  hecomes  of 
Dr.  Coit's  nameless  author  of  "  1757,  2  vols.  8vo.  ?"  What  hecomes  of  the 
historical  accuracy  of  Dr.  Coit,  who  can  huild  so  much  upon  a  "  FACT,"  which 
he  thinks  will  never  die,  but  which,  after  all,  turns  out  to  he  a  sheer  ridiculous 
blunder  of  his  own  ? 

"The  adventurers,"  says  Noah  Webster,  with  entire  truth  (Hist.,  p.  100), 
"  attempted  to  procure  a  patent  under  the  Virginia  Company,  but  they  found  it 
very  difficult,  on  account  of  the  odiousness  of  their  principles.  They  finally 
obtained  one  in  the  name  of  John  Wincob,  but  he  failing  to  remove  to  Ame- 
rica, it  was  of  no  use,  and  they  came  without  one." 

Save  this  patent  from  the  Virginia  Company,  there  is  no  sense  in  which  the 
Colonists  had  any  pretensions  to,  or  expectation  of,  any  Charter  at  all.  This 
Virginia  Charter,  moreover,  is,  as  I  shall  show,  not  the  one  to  which  Dr.  Coit 
refers,  in  the  statements  in  question ;  so  that,  so  far  forth  as  his  statements 
and  facts  are  concerned,  it  is  in  the  fullest  sense  absolutely  true,  that  they  came 
without  any  Charter  at  all.f 

But  Dr.  Coit's  blunders  about  this  famous  Charter,  are  not  yet  half  revealed. 
So  far,  he  had  written  and  published  ten  years  ago  ;  and  now,  at  the  instance 
of  the  Bishops  and  clergy,  and  under  their  signatures,  that  they  may  share 
with  him  the  responsibility, — he  puts  forth  the  same  statements  again  into  the 

*  Dr.  Coit  here  manifestly  mistakes  the  Council  established  at  Plymouth,  in  the 
county  of  Devon  (to  whom  this  magnificent  Charter  belonged),  for  the  Plymouth 
colonists.  But,  even  so,  he  quotes  the  wrong  Charter;  for  the  Charter  of  the  Ply- 
mouth Council  extended  from  the  40th  to  the  48th  degree  north  latitude,  while  the 
one  which  Dr.  Coit  attributes  to  theLeyden  Pilgrims,  he  says  (p.  16),  extended  from 
"  Nova  Scotia  to  the  southern  parts  of  Carolina."  Here  he  evidently  blunders  again, 
mistaking  the  Virginia  Charter  of  1602,  for  that  of  the  Council  at  Plymouth,  of 
1620.  Moreover,  the  Charter  of  the  Plymouth  Council  was  not  granted  to  Puri- 
tans, but  to  "  The  Duke  of  Lenox,  the  Marquesses  of  Buckingham  and  Hamilton, 
the  Earls  of  Arundel  and  Warwick,  Sir  F.  Georges,"  and  their  associates.  More- 
over, it  was  not  the  Patent  of  the  Plymouth  Council  that  was  transferred  to  Ame- 
rica, as  Dr.  Coit  represents,  but  the  Patent  of  Massachusetts,  which  the  Plymouth 
Council  sold  to  Endicott  and  his  associates,  and  which  King  Charles  confirmed 
by  Charter,  March  4,  1629. 

t  The  Patent  which  the  Plymouth  Colonists  received,  was  granted  Jan.  13, 
1630,  by  "The  Council  for  New  England," — in  "consideration  that  William  Brad- 
ford and  his  associates  have  for  these  nine  years  lived  in  New  England,  and  have 
there  planted  a  town  called  New  Plymouth,  at  their  own  charges,  and  now  seeing 
by  the  special  providence  of  God  and  their  extraordinary  care  and  industry,  they 
have  increased  their  plantations  to  near  300  people."  The  boundaries  of  this 
Patent,  were  "between  Cohasset  rivulet  on  the  north,  and  Narragansett  river 
towards  the  south  ;"  thfr  Atlantic  on  the  east,  and  westward  "  to  the  utmost  bounds 
of  a  country  in  New  England  called  Pacanokit,  alias  Swamset."  ["  Book  of 
Charters,"  Prince,  p.  270.  Prince  shows  the  mistakes  of  Hubbard  and  Dudley — 
with  regard  to  another  grant  from  the  King,  which  miscarried ;  and  with  regard  to 
"  successive  Patents  from  King  James  and  Charles."] 


420 


REVIEW. 


light.  On  pp.  130,  133,  he  again  puts  the  provision  of  this  famous  Charter 
into  the  hands  of  the  Plymouth  colonists — "  Kobinson  forsakes  Smith.  He 
goes  to  Leyden,  where  he  and  his  preach  a  ten  years'  homily  to  Calvinists,  or 
breakers  of  the  Sabbath,"  &c.  "  The  prospect  becomes  weary,"  "  and  they 
determine  to  go  away" — "  This  is  the  plain  short  tale."  "  They  style  them- 
selves voluntary  exiles  from  our  dear  native  country," — "  that  the  people  of 
Holland  did  not  drive  them  out."  "  Pass  we  now  from  this,  to  the  next 
advance  in  our  Pilgrim's  Progress,  and  let  us  inquire  there"  *  *  "  stepping 
out  upon  that  memorable  Rock"  [of  Plymouth].  "  Now  by  the  side  of"  this 
[Plymouth  Rock]  "  is  the  fit  place  to  examine  that  wondrous  piece  of  parchment" 
[the  Charter]  "  to  which  I  have  again  and  again  referred."  But  at  this  period,  he 
has  discovered  a  part  of  his  former  blunder ;  and  the  Charter  belongs  not  now 
to  the  Pilgrims — who  went,  like  the  raven,  upon  the  waters  till  they  had 
obtained  it : — it  belongs  now  to  the  "  Council  established  at  Plymouth  in  the 
county  of  Devon,"  in  England ;  under  "  the  ban  of  whose  princely  privileges," 
he  says  these  Pilgrims  expect  to  grow,  &c.  Here  he  quotes  the  glowing  lan- 
guage of  Bancroft,  describing  the  extent  and  richness  of  the  grant, — from  the 
40th  to  the  48th  degree  of  north  latitude — from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific. — 
In  this  connection,  he  again  (p.  135)  quotes  his  old  author  of  "  1757 — 2  Vols. 
8vo."  ii.,  140 — to  show,  that  "  This  Colony  [Plymouth]  received  its  principal 
assistance  from  the  discontent  of  several  great  men  of  the  Puritan  party  ; — to 
wit,  of  those  who  had  obtained  this  Charter,  and  "  who  entertained  a  design  of 
settling  among  them  in  New  England,  if  they  should  fail,"  in  their  ambitious 
designs  "  in  their  molher  country." 

After  this  famous  charter  has  figured  so  largely  in  his  book,  he  at  length,  in 
the  notes  at  the  end  of  his  volume,  discovers  that  his  original  statement  is 
erroneous;  and  says,  Note  5,  "  There  is  a  technical  inaccuracy  here,  which, 
however,  redounds  not  to  the  credit  of  the  Puritans,  but  the  contrary.  The 
charter  under  which  they  first  acted,  was  the  charter  of  the  Plymouth  council 
in  England  ;  and  it  is  from  this,  and  not  from  the  charter  of  1629  (obtained 
after  they  had  left  England)  that  the  quotations  of  the  text  come."  (He  refers 
in  his  note  to  (p.  17)  his  original  statement,  representing  the  Pilgrims  as  led 
across  the  waters  from  Holland,  by  the  splendid  provisions  of  this  charter.) 

What  a  blundering  author  is  this,  who  after  ten  years'  study  cannot  correct 
his  former  blunder,  without  falling  into  a  half  a  dozen  other  blunders  still 
more  ridiculous !  Here  is  a  concession,  that  he  aimed  at  quoting  from  the 
charter  of  1629 — but  by  "  a  technical  inaccuracy"  he  blundered  into  the 
Charter  of  the  English  Company  in  the  county  of  Devon, — instead  of  taking 
his  extracts  from  the  one  he  should  have  quoted  !  And  really,  Dr.  Coit  now 
confesses,  that  he  should  have  quoted, — and  supposed  he  had  quoted — from  the 
Charter  of  1629,  to  account  for  the  motives  which  actuated  the  Pilgrims  in 
1620  !  And  this  is  "  a  technical  inaccuracy" — "  which,  however,  redounds 
not  to  the  Puritan  credit,  but  rather  the  contrary  !"  And  the  good  Bishops 
and  clergy  have  given  him  "  their  signatures"  to  share  with  him  the  "  respon- 
sibility" of  publishing  disagreeable  facts  !" — (p.  1.)  And  that  too,  after  they 
had  had  his  remarkable  discovery  about  the  Charter  before  them  for  ten  years  ! 


REVIEW.  421 

But  we  are  not  yet  at  the  end  of  Dr.  Coifs  blunderings  about  the  Charter. 
He  says  in  his  note,  that  the  Charter  under  which  the  Puritans  in  question  (viz. 
the  pilgrims  from  Holland)  "  first  acted,  was  the  Charter  of  the  Plymouth 
council  in  England ;  and  it  is  from  this"  "  that  the  quotations  in  the  text  come." 
Very  well :  from  what  Charter  should  they  come,  save  from  the  on%  under 
which  the  Pilgrims  "  first  acted  ?"  Is  there  any  "  technical  inaccuracy"  here  ? 
Ought  he  rather  to  account  for  the  motives  of  their  action,  by  a  Charter  given 
nine  years  after  they  had  acted  ?  Be  it  so,  that  the  true  reasons  were  given 
after  all — since  Dr.  Coit  leaves  it  as  true  in  the  text ;  be  it  so,  that  they  came 
induced  by  the  provisions  of  that  splendid  Charter  "  under  which"  they  "  first 
acted."  What  will  Dr.  Coit  say  now  to  the  small  fact,  that  the  Plymouth 
company  in  England,  under  whose  auspices  he  represents  the  Holland  Puri- 
tans as  "  acting  first,"  was  not  in  existence  till  the  Pilgrims  were  already  well 
nigh  across  the  ocean  ?  Says  Prince  (p.  130),  "  I  have  now  only  to  remind 
the  reader,  that  utterly  unsought,  and  then,  unknown  to  them,  on  Nov.  3, 
about  a  week  before  their  arriving  at  Cape  Cod,  King  James  signs  a  Patent  for 
the  incorporation  of  the  adventurers  to  the  Northern  colony  of  Virginia, 

between  40  and  48  degrees  north  ; styling  them  the  Council  established 

at  Plymouth  in  the  county  of  Devon,  for  the  planting,  &c.,  of  New  England, 
in  America."  Surely,  surely,  the  provisions  of  that  Charter,  and  the  favor  of 
that  Company,  could  not  be  among  the  reasons  which  led  the  Holland  Pil- 
grims to  America,  when  neither  was  that  Charter,  nor  that  Company  in  exist- 
ence, till  these  Pilgrims  were  almost  across  the  ocean  !* 

Once  more,  I  say,  what  a  blundering  historian  is  this ;  who  with  ample 

*  Nor  is  it  possible  for  Dr.  Coit  to  retreat,  by  saying  that  he  meant  not  the  Plymouth 
Puritans,  but  those  of  Massachusetts  ;  he  expressly,  repeatedly,  and  in  the  most 
direct  and  strongest  terms  applies  these  things  to  the  Plymouth  Colonists  by  name ; 
moreover,  he  cuts  himself  off  from  escaping  through  any  possible  loop-holes — by 
saying  that  he  meant,  in  a  general  and  indefinite  way,  to  extend  these  particular 
specifications  to  the  Pilgrims  who  came,  in  after  days,  to  the  Massachusetts 
colony ; — he  cuts  himself  off  from  this  in  the  text  (p.  17),  by  specifying  the 
Charter  <;  which  they  had  wit  or  influence  enough  to  obtain,  even  when  they  had  left 
England:"  and  in  the  Note  (5),  he  expressly  says  the  Charter  "  obtained  after  they 
had  left  England"  Now  whatever  Charter  the  Massachusetts  Colonists  had,  they 
obtained  before  they  left  England.  On  March  19,  1628,  the  Council  for  New  Eng- 
land sold  Endicott  and  others  the  tract  between  the  Merrimack  and  the  Charles, 
with  three  miles  beyond  each,  and  westward  to  the  Pacific  ocean. 

Some  time  after  this  "  Mr.  White  brings  these  grantees  into  acquaintance  with 
several  other  religious  persons  in  and  about  London,  who  are  first  associated  to 
them,  then  buy  their  right  in  the  Patent,  and  consult  about  settling  some  plantation 
in  the  Massachusetts  Bay,  on  the  account  of  religion"  (Mass.  Col.  Records  in  Prince^ 
p.  248).  Their  pioneer,  Mr.  Endicott,  sails  June  20,  1628.  March  4,  1629,  King 
Charles  confirms  the  Charter — and  makes  them  a  body  corporate  and  politic. 
March  23,  1629,  they  hear  of  "  Mr.  Higginson,  an  eminent  minister  silenced  for 
non-conformity,"  who  might  probably  be  obtained  to  go  with  the  colony.  April  16, 
"  sixty  women  and  maids,  twenty-six  children,  and  300  men,  with  victuals,  arms, 
apparel,  tools,  and  140  head  of  cattle,"  sail  for  New  England,  This  was  the  first 
Massachusetts  Colony. 


422  REVIEW. 

documents  before  him,  and  after  ten  years'  study,  and  so  sure  that  his  facts 
will  be  scrutinized,  that  he  expects  to  be  "  rhetorically  crucified," —  is  yet 
incompetent  to  come  at  the  truth  in  so  simple  a  matter  of  fact ;  but  writes  a 
whole  book,  basing  its  main  argument  upon  a  series  of  blunders  so  gross,  that  the 
least  oi  them  would,  in  Dr.  Busby's  time,  have  earned  for  the  unlucky  tyro 
who  should  make  it,  a  thorough  birching !  And  this  is  the  advocacy 
which  "  several  of  the  Bishops,  and  many  of  the  clergy,"  have  called  in,  to  the 
precious  work  of  blackening  the  character  of  the  Puritans,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  Church !  This  is  the  work,  which,  Dr.  Coit  fondly  thinks,  is  to  cause 
such  a  "  tempest  of  rain,  hail,  and  horrid  thunder-claps ;"  but  which  is,  never- 
theless, to  overturn  not  only  the  records  of  the  Pilgrims  themselves,  but  the 
current  and  settled  history,  received  by  the  whole  world  !  "  It  was  necessary," 
says  Dr.  Coit,  "  that  some  one  should  bring  these  facts  into  open  view."  "  My 
FACTS  will  not  be  extinguished."  Yes;  his  FACTS  are  to  give  him  immortality  ! 

DR.    COIT   ON    THE   ORIGIN   AND   GENERALSHIP   OF  THE   PURITANS. 

But  it  is  time  to  proceed  to  other  "  Facts." 

Dr.  Coit  maintains  that  "  the  fanatics  of  Germany  are  the  first  fathers  of 
Puritanism — "  (p.  26),  that  "  the  term  Roundhead  "  was  well  known  in 
England  long  before  its  appearance  on  the  English  shores ;  and  if  the  outside 
of  its  head  was  imported  from  a  land  of  fierce  fanaticism,  it  is  hard  to  suppose 
that  some  of  the  inside  of  it  did  not  come  from  the  same  source  /'*  that  "  these 
pretenders  to  tenderness  of  conscience"  (p.  27)  "  would  have  meted  out  and 
trodden  down  Church  and  State,  as  straw  is  trodden  down  for  the  dunghill ;" 
(p.  29) ;  that  this  was  foreseen  and  dreaded  by  Laud"  (p.  38) ;  that  by  "  expert" 
generalship,  they  "  commenced  their  warfare  on  such  jots  and  tittles  as  caps 
and  surplices" — as  "  an  expert  general  attacks  a  fortress,  almost  impregnable" 
"  by  drawing  his  lines  of  circumvallation,  cutting  off  a  bastion  here,  and  a 
redoubt  there ;  till  he  can  bring  his  guns  to  bear  upon  its  citadel,  and  beat  that 

•  On  p.  25,  Dr.  Coit  says,  "It  is  generally  supposed,  that  Puritanism  took  its 
rise  from  the  exiles,  who  were  compelled  to  fly  the  kingdom  in  the  reign  of  Queen 
Mary."  This  however  Dr.  C.  denies,  and  refers  to  two  authorities — a  "  folio"  of 
"Dugdale,"  who  was  born  half  a  century  after  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary;  and  to 
Bishop  Hall  in  the  time  of  the  Long  Parliament.  Dugdale,  he  says,  "  advances  the 
opinion"  that  they  [the  Puritans]  "  were  first  imported  into  England  from  the 
Continent,  in  the  reign  of  King  Edward  VI.," — and  that  "  Calvin  would  have  had 
Somerset,  the  Protector,  restrain  them  by  the  avenging  sword."  He  then  quotes 
Bishop  Hall,  who  after  talking  about  "  Jack  Straws,  and  Cades  and  Wat  Tylers" — 
says,  "  Those  of  your  Lordships  that  have  read  the  history  of  the  Anabaptistical 
tumults  at  Munster,  will  need  no  other  item ;  let  it  be  enough  to  say  that  many  of 
these  sectaries  are  of  the  same  profession  "  (p.  26J.  Here  then  is  Dr.  Coit's  author- 
ity for  the  fact ;  that  "  the  Fanatics  of  Germany"  "imported  into  England," — are 
the  first  fathers  of  English  Puritanism  ! — an  "  opinion"  of  Dugdale,  expressed  in  his 
"  folio,"  and  the  assertion  of  Bishop  Hall— that  "  many  of  these  sectaries  "  are" — 
what?  German  Anabaptists  ?  imported  from  the  Continent?  No— but  are  of  the 
same  profession!1'  On  this  authority  Dr.  Coit  ventures  roundly  to  contradict  what 
has  "  been  generally  supposed"  on  the  credit  of  the  generally  received  history  of  the 
times !  How  very  astute ! 


REVIEW.  423 

to  pieces  about  the  ears  of  his  opponents,  unless  they  surrender  at  discretion. 
And  so  did  the  Puritans  begin  in  England  ;" — that  "  Charles  I.  comprehended 
the  game,"  so  did  King  Jamie,  for  he  "  had  all  the  shrewdness  of  a  Scotch- 
man, if  he  did  sometimes  exhibit  the  fooleries  of  a  pedant." 

But  here  are  "  FACTS"  enough  for  one  digestion  ;  let  us  pause  a  moment. 

As  to  the  design  and  generalship  of  the  Puritans  in  England,  who  "  began" 
about  "  such  jots  and  tittles  as  caps  and  surplices,"  it  is  well  known  who,  if 
anybody,  began  this  artful  warfare.  One  would  scarcely  suppose — if  it  did 
not  appear  from  Dr.  Coifs  immortal  "  facts,"  that  the  venerable  Bishop  and 
martyr  Hooper,  who  "  began"  to  scruple  such  "  jots  and  tittles  as  caps  and 
surplices,"  could  have  entertained  such  an  ulterior  and  nefarious  design  against 
the  Church  and  State  of  England.  One  would  scarce  suppose  that  Miles 
Coverdale  the  Bishop,  and  Fox  the  Martyrologist,  were  only  acting  the  part  of 
"  expert  generals"  when  they  doomed  themselves  to  obscurity  and  poverty  by 
refusing  the  habits,  rather  than  to  roll  in  honor  and  wealth  as  dignitaries  of 
the  Church  by  a  timely  conformity.  But  so  it  seems,  it  must  have  been.  Dr. 
Coit's  "  FACTS"  cannot  live  without  this,  and  Dr.  Coit's  facts  "  will  not  die  !" 
And  yet  one  would  suppose  that  Dr.  C.  would  find  some  difficulty  with  such 
names  as  Hooper,  Coverdale,  and  Fox.  Not  at  all :  Dr.  Coit  sees  no  difficulty 
here ;  or  if  he  does,  he  can  dispose  of  it  with  a  sneer.  "  Hooper,"  says  Dr. 
Coit  (p.  45),  "  chameleon  like,  caught  the  color  of  his  ecclesiastical  associa- 
tions" [on  the  Continent].  "  He  returned  with  a  passion  for  stark  simplicity. 
He  protested  against  the  Episcopal  robes  when  about  to  be  consecrated — " 
"  Possibly  he  was  a  little  proud  of  his  plainness,  as  Plato  told  Diogenes  he 
was  of  his  rags."  Indeed,  as  a  shrewd  writer  has  observed,  Satan  himself 
regards,  as  his  darling  sin,  « the  pride  that  apes  humility.'  "  So  "Old  Miles 
Coverdale" — "  shrunk  from  Episcopal  drapery,  with  the  same  sensitiveness 
\vhich  had  afflicted  the  epidermis  of  his  Rt.  Rev.  brother."  And  "  John  Fox, 
summoned  by  the  Primate  and  Metropolitan  of  all  England  to  subscribe  to  the 
Liturgy,  Articles,  and  Canons" — "  the  sturdy  old  won-conformist  thrust  a  New 
Testament  into  his  face,  and  said  he  would  subscribe  to  that,  and  that  alone ;" 
and  Dr.  C.  appears  to  think  it  a  marvellous  instance  of  mercy  in  the  "highest 
magnate  in  the  land,"  that  Fox  was  not  sent  to  the  "  dungeons  of  the  Tower ;" 
but  "  died  quietly  in  his  nest." 

Now,  although  Dr.  Coit  does  not  directly  charge  these  nefarious  designs 
upon  Hooper,  Coverdale,  and  Fox, — the  scope  of  his  argument  must  needs 
include  them.  These,  as  I  have  said,  "  began"  the  war  against "  such  jots 
and  tittles  as  Caps  and  Surplices."  Dr.  Coit's  "  facts"  weigh  as  heavily  against 
them  as  against  any  others.  If  these  were  not  guilty  of  aiming,  with  expert 
generalship,  at  the  overthrow  of  Church  and  State,  then  the  charge  surely 
does  not  lie  against  the  people,  who,  for  several  generations,  were  plundered', 
imprisoned,  or  banished  for  non-conformity.  The  charge  surely  cannot  lie 
against  the  company  of  Puritans, — who  were  seized,  plundered,  and  separated 
from  their  wives  and  children, — as  they  were  about  to  flee  into  Holland. 
Their  persecutors,  and  the  persecutors  of  the  generations  before  them,  alleged 
no  such  criminal  designs  against  them-,  as  Dr.  Coit  charges  upon  them,  but  openly 


424  REVIEW. 

and  boldly,  and  avowedly,  inflicted  these  things  upon  them  for  non-wnformity. 
I  humbly  submit,  to  the  judgment  of  the  reader,  whether  this  fact  is  not  con- 
clusive against  the  charges  of  Dr.  Coit,  that  they  are  mere  gratuitous  slanders. 

MARVELLOUS    PREACHING   OF   THE   PURITAN    MINISTERS. 

Dr.  Coit  has  another  "  fact"  to  prove  the  original  and  nefarious  designs  of 
the  Puritans.  "  The  end  which  the  Puritans  did  finally  lay  hold  on, 
and  the  manner  in  which  they  rode  down  Episcopalians,  and  rode  round 
Presbyterians,  satisfies  me  completely,"  says  he,  "  that  the  end  was  foreseen 
(in  hope  at  least)  long  before  they  attained  the  prize  of  their  calling"  (p.  34). 
"  It  was  not  enough  for  them  to  annihilate  offices,  they  must  cut  off  heads  also. 
The  blood  of  Strafford  and  Laud,  and  Charles  I.  will  stain  their  annals  for  ever." 
"  It  will  never  answer,  therefore,  for  the  Puritan  ministers  to  resist  the  imputa- 
tion of  blood-guiltiness."  "  The  Puritan  ministers  preached  down  Strafford, 
and  Laud,  and  Charles ;  and  Puritan  emissaries  of  State  dragged  them  to  the 
block."  (p.  36.) 

What  has  all  this  to  do  with  "  Plymouth  Rock  Harangues,"  and  with  the 
Puritan  Fathers  of  New  England?  The  Pilgrims  fled  to  Holland  in  1608. 
They  landed  at  Plymouth  in  1620.  The  first  emigrants  to  Massachusetts 
colony  came  in  16 28, 16 29,  and  1630.  Charles  I.  was  beheaded  in  1649.  And  yet 
"  the  end,"  which  was  finally  attained  in  England  in  1649,  convinces  Dr.  Coit  of 
the  original  nefarious  designs  of  the  Puritans, — of  these  fugitives  to  Holland,  and 
of  those  who  had  been  settled  in  New  England  29  years ; — a  period  wanting 
only  one  year  of  the  life-time  of  a  generation.  Truly,  Dr.  Coit  must  be  in  dis- 
tress for  "facts,"  and  for  arguments,  too  ! 

But  there  are  two  or  three  small  facts  more  against  these  conclusions  of  Dr. 
Coit.  The  Puritan  pulpits  had  been  emptied  again  and  again;  the  Puritan 
people  had  been  imprisoned  or  banished,  till,  at  the  time  when  the  Pilgrims 
were  driven  to  Holland,  it. was  supposed  that  not  twenty  ministers,  known  to  be 
favorable  to  their  principles,  were  left  in  the  Church  of  England,  in  all  her  ten 
thousand  parishes.  What  mighty  preachers  these  must  have  been,  to  out- 
preach  the  nine  thousand  church-preachers,  with  all  the  deacons,  arch-deacons, 
bishops,  and  archbishops  to  boot ! — nay,  writh  the  civil  courts,  and  all  the  jails 
and  prisons  in  old  England  to  aid  the  church  clergy,  besides  ! — to  preach  down 
the  Archbishop,  the  Premier,  and  the  King  together !  Wonderful  preaching 
this  !  and  all  in  the  very  worst  cause  ;  with  neither  truth  nor  reason  on  their 
side  !  Dr.  Coit,  however,  forgets  that  known  and  avowed  Puritans  were  not 
suffered  to  preach  at  al] ;  not  in  the  churches  of  the  Establishment,  nor  yet  in 
the  fields.  They  were  silenced,  fined,  imprisoned,  and  glad,  if  they  might  so 
far  escape  the  vigilance  of  the  hierarchy,  as  to  steal  away  to  the  wilds  of 
America.  No,  the  truth  was,  that  after  the  Puritans  had  been  as  far  as  pos- 
sible subdued  and  driven  off,  those  who  had  remained  STAUNCH  CHURCHMEN, 
rose  upon  their  tyrant  king  and  his  ministers,  and,  after  a  noble  and  glori- 
ous conflict  for  the  rights  of  Englishmen,  put  them  down.  In  standing  for  the 
rights  of  conscience  and  for  freedom,  they  were  necessarily  led  to  the  adoption 
of  some  of  the  main  principles  of  the  Puritans ;  and  at  length  many  of  them 


REVIEW.  425 

became  Puritans  outright ;  but,  glorious  as  the  struggle  was — we  cannot  claim 
its  honors  for  the  Fathers  of  New  England.  They  were  away,  three  thou- 
sand miles  distant ; — exiles  for  conscience'  sake,  and  for  freedom  to  worship 
God. 

DR     COIT   ON   THE   PRESENT   DESIGNS   OF   ENGLISH   DISSENTERS. 

Yet  Dr.  Coit  insists  upon  these  original  and  ulterior  designs  of  the  Puritans. 
"  Yes,"  he  says  (p.  349),  "  Puritanism  would  have  done,  in  ages  past,  what  Dis- 
sent is  ready  to  do,  and  striving  to  do,  in  this  current  hour.  Dissent  would 
blithesomely  overturn  a  government,  which  keeps  the  balance  in  a  hemisphere ; 
even  though  it  must  die  in  the  entombment  of  its  accounted  foe.  And  die  it 
will,  if  it  succeed  in  bringing  England  to  the  desolation  of  an  agrarian  level. 
Like  the  sinner  who  perishes  utterly  in  his  own  corruption,  it  will  be  crushed 
in  the  ruin  it  will  have  wrought." 

Here  is  another  of  Dr.  Coit's  "  FACTS  ;"  that  the  Dissenters  in  England  are 
"  striving"  "  in  this  current  hour,"  to  "  overturn"  the  British  "  Government!" 

There  is  doubtless  just  as  much  truth  in  this  accusation,  as  there  is  in  Dr. 
Coit's  assertions  concerning  the  ulterior  and  original  designs  of  the  old  Puritans. 
Half  the  people  who  regularly  attend  upon  the  public  worship  of  God  in  England, 
are  Dissenters.  If  Dr.  Coit  were  there — in  the  seat  of  Archbishop  Laud,  and 
possessed  of  his  power,  these  wicked  Dissenters  should  doubtless  know  what 
it  is  to  aim  at  overturning  the  State,  and  to  provoke  an  Archbishop. 

COURTEOUS    AND     LENIENT    DISPOSITION   OF   THE   CHURCH   IN   PERSECUTING    THE 

PURITANS. 

I  say  doubtless,  for  Dr.  Coit  contends  further:  1,  That  "there  was  the 
greatest  disposition  to  treat  the  moderate  party  of  the  Puritans  with  indul- 
gence" (p.  43) ;  and  2,  That  the  Church  had  a  right  to  enforce  upon  them  her 
requirements,  by  such  penalties  as  she  did. 

With  regard  to  the  first  of  these  positions  he  says,  "  If  anything  be  wanting" 
[to  substantiate  this  allegation]  "  it  is  supplied  by  the  fact"  that  old  Queen 
Bess  was  most  politely  conciliatory,"  in  offering  "  to  acquiesce  in  an  omission 
of  three  superlatively  dismal  exactions," — "  provided  there  were  uniformity  in 
other  things." — "  In  view  of  such  evidence,"  he  says  (p.  49),  "  a  man  must  be 
voracious  in  appetite,  and  fastidious  in  digestion,  beyond  all  reasonable  dys- 
peptic liberty,  if  he  could  still  demand  proof  of  the  lenient  and  courteous  dispo- 
sition of  the  Government,  towards  all  who  were  moderate  and  gentlemanly  in 
their  objections,  &c."  "That  they  treated  a  hirsute  and  greedy  generation, 
who  would  have  handled  them  with  the  paw  of  the  lion,  and  the  paw  of  the  bear, 
with  less  amenity,  may  not  be,  possibly  among  the  world's  seven  wonders." 
This  position  he  advances  as  a  Fact,  not  only  in  his  own  eyes  but  those  of 
Dr.  Jarvis  also. 

With  the  leave  of  Dr.  Coit,  and  of  Dr.  Jarvis,  I  would  humbly  suggest  that 
these  things  are  matters  of  opinion  rather  than  of  fact.  It  depends  very  much 
upon  what  is  thought  to  be  moderate,  and  lenient,  and  gentlemanly  in  these 
matters  ;  and  upon  what  degree  of  "  indulgence"  is  thought  to  be  due  to  rights 


426  REVIEW. 

of  conscience.  If  it  be  "  lenient"  and  "  courteous,"  to  set  spies  in  every  par- 
ish, to  report  every  omission  of  a  ceremony,  of  a  cap,  or  surplice,  or  tippet ; — 
if  it  be  thought  "  courteous"  to  compel  men,  by  the  oath  ex-officio,  to  accuse 
themselves  and  their  neighbors ;  if  it  be  thought  "  indulgent"  to  fine,  distress, 
and  imprison  the  most  quiet  citizens  who  shall  be  guilty  of  non-conformity, — 
and  to  retain  them  in  prison  till  the  unwholesome  air,  and  hunger,  and  cold, 
cause  pestilence  and  death — all  for  simple  non-conformity ; — and  if  it  be  not 
"  gentlemanly"  for  such  prisoners  to  send  their  humble  petition  that  they  "  may 
not  perish  without  trial,  but  have  the  benefit  of  the  laws,"  as  well  as  some 
"  relief  for  their  distressed  consciences;"  if  these  things  be  so,  then  I  sub- 
missively concede  to  Drs.  Coit  and  Jarvis,  that  the  Puritans  were  not  "  gen- 
tlemanly ;"  and  that  because  they  were  not  gentlemanly,  the  bearing  of  the 
Bishops  towards  this  "  hirsute  and  greedy  generation,"  was  "  lenient"  and 
"  courteous."  But  when  I  concede  this  to  the  Doctors,  they,  of  necessity, 
must  avow  this  to  be  their  doctrine  concerning  what  is  lenient,  and  courteous, 
and  gentlemanly,  in  matters  pertaining  to  the  Rights  of  Conscience,  touching 
the  worship  of  God. 

DR.  COIT  ON  THE  RIGHT  TO  PERSECUTE. 

I  say,  they  must  admit  this  to  be  their  doctrine  ;  and  Dr.  Coit  will  probably 
find  no  diniculty  in  doing  so,  since,  2,  He  lays  down  this  doctrine  concerning 
the  right  of  the  National  Church  to  persecute  non- conformists.  On  p.  67 
he  asks,  "  What  possibly  consistent  argument  can  be  urged,  that  this  govern- 
ment should  have  yielded  to  their  demands  ?"  (They  demanded  nothing  but 
liberty  to  worship  God  without  doing  violence  to  their  own  consciences.)  "  A 
great  nation,"  continues  Dr.  Coit,  "  not  to  manage  its  concerns  in  its  own  way, 
but  to  submit  to  the  dictation  of  a  petty  clan,  whose  best  commendation  is,  that 
themselves  think  themselves  holier,  wiser,  and  worthier."  And  because  it  will 
not, — and  arrests  (it  may  be  not  with  a  nurse's  gentleness  to  a  queasy  baby) 
that  unruly  evil — are  "  its  acts"  to  be  "  denounced,  not  to  the  third  and  fourth 
(the  Divine  limit),  but  to  the  thirtieth  and  fortieth  generation,  as  the  quintes- 
sence of  tyranny  ?  0  modesty !  truth,  and  candor !  is  such  a  perversion  of 
right  reason  one  of  the  illustrations  of  Total  Depravity?"  " But  does  not  sim- 
ple fact  authorize  me  to  draw  this  picture,  of  the  restless  demands,  the  sour 
aspersions,  and  the  demolishing  schemes  of  the  thorough-bred  Puritans  ?" 

Here  we  have  it :  the  "  great  nation"  had  a  right  to  impose  these  ceremonies 
and  habits,  by  law ;  and  to  enforce  them  upon  those  "  queasy  babies,"  the  Puri- 
tans ;  and  "  What  possibly  consistent  argument  can  be  urged  why  this  Govern- 
ment should  have  yielded  to  their  demands  ?"  And  "  such  a  perversion  of 
right  reason,"  as  to  denounce  these  acts  of  the  government  as  "  the  quintessence 
of  tyranny,"  is  "  one  of  the  illustrations  of  the  Doctrine  of  Total  Depravity.*' 
Verily,  it  becometh  Dr.  Coit  to  be  earnest  in  his  eulogies  of  the  Earl  of  Straf- 
ford  and  of  Archbishop  Laud.* 

*  He  finds  another  argument  of  the  wickedness  of  the  Puritans  in  the  wilfulness 
of  their  discontent ;  which,  both  as  a  testimony  and  as  an  argument,  is  very  amus- 
ing. He  interweaves  it  here,  on  his  69th  page  ;  "  I  know  not  the  people  beneath  the 


REVIEW.  .  427 

Dr.  Coit  continues  his  justification  of  the  severities  practised  hy  the  Church 
of  England  (p.  71).  "The  Church  of  England  was  in  the  field  before  them 
[the  Puritans].  "  This  Church,  then,  had  the  right,  the  vested  right  of  pos- 
session. It  had,  what  a  Puritan  taste  so  much  desired  to  see  confirmed  by 
Charter."  "  What  right  can  be  pretended  by  these  men,  to  attempt  innovations 
in  Church  and  State  ?"  "  But  these  self-satisfied  advocates  of  liberty  and 
equality  were  nothing  daunted  by  such  considerations, "  "  and"  "  when  even 
force  and  cunning  fail,"  "  they  abandon  England  in  vexation,  to  play  their 
favorite  game  on  a  more  open  theatre — oh,  they  are  persecuted  by  those 
caterpillars  of  the  world,  who  consume  yearly  twenty-five  hundred  or  three 
thousand  pounds,"  and  fly  in  pious  horror  from  their  father-land,  for  "a  pur  el- 
religious  cause"  (p.  72). 

DR.    COIT   CONTRADICTS   THE   PILGRIMS    TO   THEIR    FACE. 

Not  content  with  assigning  his  own  "  Reasons  for  the  erection  of  a  Puritan 
economy  on  American  soil,"  Dr.  Coit  (p.  104)  sets  himself  to  contradict  the 
reasons  assigned  by  the  Puritans  themselves.  Here  he  pitches  battle  with 
Morton,  "  the  prim  apologetic  secretary"  of  the  Plymouth  Colony — "  a  Puri- 
tan indeed,  in  whom  there  is  no  Churchmanship  at  all," — who  published  his 
"  Memorial-'  in  1669.  Whoever  will  take  the  trouble  to  compare  the  five 
reasons  of  Morton  with  those  assigned  by  Governors  Bradford  and  Winslow 
(both  among  the  most  prominent  actors  in  the  scenes  in  question),  will  find, 
that  Morton  takes  his  reasons  wholly  from  Gov.  Bradford's  history,  and  from 
Winslow's  "  True  Grounds  or  cause  of  the  first  planting  of  New  England,"  and, 
for  the  most  part,  in  their  precise  words.  Dr.  Coit  either  did  not  know,  or 
else  he  did  not  see  fit  to  disclose  the  fact,  that  he  is  here  setting  himself  to  con. 
tradict  by  argument,  the  statements  of  the  very  actors  of  the  events  in  ques- 
tion ;  and  that,  too,  of  men  whose  word  is  iinimpeached  and  unimpeachable. 

The  sum  of  the  reasons  assigned  by  Bradford  and  Winslow,  and  repeated  by 
Morton,  is  :  "  The  hardness  of  the  place" — "  few  of  their  friends  in  England 
could  come  to  them — and  fewer  that  would  bide  it  out,  and  continue  with  them." 
"  For  many,  though  they  desired  to  enjoy  the  ordinances  of  God  in  their 

sun,  so  zealous  for  their  peculiar  habits,  institutions,  and  privileges,"  "  as  New 
Englanders— not  the  people  who  would  sooner  resent  or  repel  any  encroachment 
on  their  freedom,  as  they  understand  it,  not  the  people,  who  would  more  stoutly, 
fiercely,  unshrinkingly,  unfailingly  defend  it  (true  freedom  or  false)  to  the  utmost 
impulse  of  strength,  and  the  latest  beat  of  the  heart.  South  Carolina  has  had  her 
Nullification,  and  New  England  her  Hartford  Convention ;  but  having  lived  in  a 
Southern  state  as  well  as  in  a  Northern  one,  I  am  free  to  say,  that  if  rebellion  must 
come,  my  most  earnest  prayer  would  be,  Let  it  not  be  among  the  posterity  of  the 
Puritans.  The  little  finger  of  rebellion  there  would  be  thicker  than  the  loins  of 
nullification  elsewhere."  "  And  this  makes  me  think,  that  the  government  of  Eng- 
land must  have  had  a  struggle  of  dread  anxiety  with  those  who  have  transmitted 
Puritan  tempers  and  principles  to  our  distant  times." 

You  are  right  there,  Dr.  Coit,  there  is  some  Puritan  blood  left  in  us  ;  and  that  is 
M  a  Fact ."  The  Puritan  Principles  are  those  of  men  who  know  their  rights,  and 
knowing,  dare  defend  them. 


428  REVIEW. 

purity,  and  the  liberty  of  the  Gospel  with  them,  yet,  alas !  they  admitted  of 
bondage,  with  danger  of  conscience,  rather  than  to  endure  those  hardships ; 
yea,  some  preferred  and  chose  prisons  in  England,  rather  than  this  liberty  in 
Holland." — (Bradford,  in  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,"  p.  45.) 

Again,  "  Old  age  began  to  come  on  some  of  them  ;  and  their  great  and  con- 
tinual crosses  and  sorrows  hastened  it  before  the  time  ;  so  as  it  was  not  only 
probably  thought,  but  apparently  seen,  that  within  a  few  years  they  were  in 
danger  to  scatter  by  necessity  pressing  them,  or  sink  under  their  burdens,  or 
both  :"*  *  "  and  therefore  thought  it  better  to  dislodge  betimes  to  some  place 
of  better  advantage  and  less  danger,  if  any  could  be  found." — (Bradford.) 

Again,  "  As  necessity  was  a  task-master  over  them,  so  they  were  forced  to 
be  such,  not  only  to  their  servants,  but  in  a  sort  to  their  dearest  children.'* 
"  For  many  of  their  children,  that  were  of  the  best  dispositions"—"  willing  to 
bear  part  of  their  parents'  burden,  were  oftentimes  so  oppressed  with  their 
heavy  burden" — "  that  their  bodies  bowed  under  the  weight  of  the  same,  and 
became  decrepit  in  their  very  youth."  Then  there  was  "  the  licentiousness 
of  the  youth  in  the  country,"  some  of  their  children  "  were  drawn  away  by 
evil  examples" — "  some  became  soldiers,  others  took  them  upon  long  voyages 
by  sea."  Winslow  adds  ;  "  How  grievous  it  was  to  live  from  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  State  of  England ;  how  like  we  were  to  lose  our  language  and 
our  name  of  English ;  how  little  good  we  did,  or  were  like  to  do  to  the  Dutch 
in  reforming  the  Sabbath ;  how  unable  there  to  give  such  education  to  our 
children,  as  we  ourselves  had  received."  He  adds  also  the  desire  of  showing 
these  friends — "  no  less  burdened"  than  themselves,  where  they  might  com- 
fortably subsist,  and  enjoy  the  like  liberties  with  us,  being  freed  from  the  anti- 
christian  bondage,  keep  their  names  and  nation,  and  be  not  only  a  means  to 
enlarge  the  dominions  of  the  State,  but  the  Church  of  Christ  also.*  Bradford 
adds  another  reason,  and  a  nobler  sentiment  was  never  expressed  by  man : 
"  Lastly  (and  that  which  was  not  the  least),  a  great  hope  and  inward  zeal  they 
had  of  laying  some  good  foundation,  or  at  least  to  make  some  way  thereunto, 
for  the  propagating  and  advancing  the  Gospel  of  the  Kingdom  of  Christ  in 
these  remote  parts  of  the  world ;  yea,  though  they  should  be  but  as  stepping- 
stones  unto  others  for  performing  of  so  great  a  work." 

Such  is  the  sum  of  the  reasons  copied  by  Morton,  and  which  Dr.  Coit  sets 
himself  to  contradict. 

Now,  it  may  safely  be  left  to  any  mortal,  in  whose  breast  there  is  one 
emotion  of  generosity,  or  of  love  either  of  country,  of  freedom,  of  truth,  or  of 
the  cause  of  religion, — to  determine  whether  here  are  not  ample  and  praise- 
worthy motives  assigned,  why  men,  who  had  already  suffered  losses,  exile, 
and  poverty,  for  conscience  sake — should  remove,  to  find  a  home  where  they 
might  still  retain  their  character  of  Englishmen,  and  secure  for  themselves  and 
for  their  posterity,  freedom  to  worship  God. 

But  Dr.  Coit  appears  to  be  incapable  of  appreciating  any  such  motives.! 

*  In  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,^.  282. 

t  This  inability  may  be,  in  part,  "natural:"  for  Dr.  Coit  (p.  232)  deems  it  a 
matter  of  sufficient  importance,  to  tell  us  the  origin  of  his  "  Episcopal  blood." 


REVIEW, 


429 


He  does  not  think  it  possible  that  men,  under  such  circumstances,  can  have 
such  a  regard  for  conscience,  for  their  posterity,  and  the  cause  of  true  religion  ! 
Oh — no ;  he  cannot  find  it  in  his  heart  to  imagine  that  such  motives  could  have 
operated.  In  his  view,  nothing  but  wilfulness,  ambition,  and  money-making 
can  account  for  the  conduct  of  the  Pilgrims.  For  twenty-six  pages  of  his 
work,  he  sets  himself  to  ridicule  these  reasons,  and  to  show  that  they  cannot 
possibly  be  the  true  ones.  He  ridicules  their  notions  of  the  Sabbath,  and  their 
efforts  to  persuade  the  Dutch  to  keep  holy  the  Sabbath  day :  affirms  that  the 
"Dutch  did  not  neglect  the  Sabbath,"  though  "doubtless"  they  "were  as 
liberal"  as  those  other  "  Continental  Protestants,"  who — like  "  Calvin,"  allow 
"  old  men"  to  "  play  at  bowls,"  and  "  young  men  to  train  on  the  Sabbath." 
The  hardships  endured  by  the  Pilgrims  in  Holland  he  turns  off  with  a  sneer : 
"  There  were  sorrows  connected  with  their  pockets,  and  their  palates,  more 
terrible  than  the  sorrows  of  a  harassed  conscience,  to  the  Puritans  at  Leyden" 
(p.  111).  As  to  their  losing  the  name  and  language  of  English,  Dr.  Coit  says, 
"  Become  Dutch  ?  Well,  what  if  they  did,  could  it  be  such  a  formidable  dis- 
aster ?"  As  to  enlarging  the  bounds  of  the  British  State,  Dr.  Coit  says,  "  And 
must  it  be  my  iron  fate  to  keep  a  perfectly  sober  countenance,  under  such  argu- 
mentation as  this,  recorded,  as  it  no  doubt  was,  with  edifying  sedateness  ?" 
No  doubt  it  was  so  recorded ;  for  Winslow,  from  whom  Morton  copies  it, 
was  no  trifler  nor  scoffer.  Dr.  Coit  may  not  be  able  to  appreciate  such  motives  ; 
but  every  heart  capable  of  feeling  one  throb  of  patriotism,  will  be  able  to 
appreciate  them.  Bradford's  last  reason,  he  parries  with  a  charge  of  simple 
bigotry  upon  "  these  bending  down  pilgrims,"  willing  "  to  be  made  stepping- 
stones  for  their  betters." 

Having  thus  disposed  of  these  reasons,  and  shown>  as  he  supposes,  that 
they  cannot  be  the  true  ones,  he  adds  two  other  reasons,  which  he  declares 
contained  the  real  motives  that  induced  the  Leyden  Pilgrims  to  sail  to 
America. 

»R.    C»IT'S    REASONS,    WHY    THE    PILGRIMS    SAILED    FROM    HOLLAND. 

The  first  of  these  is  (p.  123), "  Tfiat  the  Puritans  in  Holland  were  not  harmo- 
nious among  themselves,  and  therefore  it  became  desirable  for  them  to  separate" 
Now,  if  this  has  any  pertinency  to  the  subject  in  hand,  it  means  that  the  Ley- 
den Pilgrims  were  not  harmonious  among  themselves.  If  there  is  any 
truth  established,  beyond  the  possibility  of  successful  question  ;  if  there 

His  Quaker  ancestor  married  a  daughter  of  Dea,  J.  B.,  of  Scituate.  "  To  this 
match  there  had  been  several  objections,  the  Quakers  disapproving  of  his  marrying 
out  of  the  society,  and  the  Congregationalists  of  his  marrying  into  theirs."  "  How- 
ever, the  sangaine  temperament  of was  not  to  be  foiled,  and  he  is  said  to  have 

addressed  the  young  woman,  in  the  presence  cf  her  family,  in  the  following  words  : 
'  Ruth,  let  us  break  away  from  this  unreasonable  bondage.  I  will  give  up  my  reli- 
gion, and  thou  shalt  give  up  thine,  and  we  will  go  to  the  Church  of  England,  and  go 

to  the  D 1  together.'    They  fulfilled  this  resolution,  adds  my  annalist,  so  far 

as  going  to  the  Church  of  England  during  life." 

.The  amount  of  this  is,  that  Dr.  Coit  is  descended  from  ancestors  of  very  loose 
principles  in  religion,  and  hence  his  "  Episcopal  blood." 


430  REVIEW. 

is  any  matter  of  fact  pertaining  to  this  history, — which  one  who  pre- 
tends to  have  been  over  the  ground,  is  inexcusable  for  not  knowing — 
it  is  the  fact  of  the  uninterrupted  and  precious  .harmony  that  always  subsisted 
among  the  Leyden  Puritans.  A  writer,  whose  name  figures  in  Dr.  Coit's 
book  as  one  of  his  authorities  (Robert  Baylie),  had  ventured,  in  the  days  of  the 
Pilgrims,  to  make  the  assertion  which  Dr.  Coit  has  now  revived,  concerning 
the  divisions  among  the  Leyden  Puritans.  Edward  Winslow  gave  the  follow- 
ing answer  to  this  aspersion.  It  is  "  alleged  (though  upon  a  great  mistake)  by 
a  late  writer,  that  division  or  disagreement  in  the  Church  of  Leyden  was  the 
occasion,  nay  cause,  of  the  first  plantation  in  New  England ;  for,  saith  the 
author,  or  to  this  effect,  when  they  could  no  longer  agree  together,  the  one 
part  went  to  New  England,  and  began  the  plantation  at  Plymouth". — "  as  if 
the  foundation  of  our  New  England  plantations  had  been  laid  upon  division  or 
separation,  than  which  nothing  is  more  untrue.  For  I  persuade  myself,  never 
people  on  earth  lived  more  lovingly  together,  and  parted  more  sweetly  than 
we,  the  Church  at  Leyden,  did  ;*  not  rashly,  in  a  distracted  humor,  but  upon 
joint  and  serious  deliberation,  often  seeking  the  mind  of  God  by  fasting  and 
prayer." 

So  Bradford  says,  in  his  Dialogue  ;  "  They  lived  together  in  love  and  peace  al] 
their  days,  without  any  considerable  differences,  or  any  disturbance  that  grew 
thereby,  but  such  as  was  easily  healed  in  love;  and  so  they  continued,  until 
with  mutual  consent  they  removed  into  New  England." — In  Young's  Chronicles. 

So,  this  first  reason  alleged  by  Dr.  Coit  is  proved  to  be  no  reason  at  all,  but 
an  inexcusable  untruth. 

His  other  reason  he  himself  appears  to  regard  as  a  rather  queer  one.  "  And 
now,"  says  he  (p.  128),  "for  *  *  the  last  reason.  It  reminds  me,  in  name  at 
least,  of  what  the  lawyers  call  the  *  negative  pregnant' " — "  It  is  this ;  The 
Pilgrims  did  not  sail  for  New  England  because  they  were  persecuted." 

Not  persecuted  !  Is  it  possible  that  there  is  a  mistake  about  this, — that  the 
Pilgrims  were  plundered,  fined,  imprisoned  in  England,  and  scarcely  escaped 
to  Holland  ?  Oh  !  no,  that  is  all  true,  nor  was  it  possible  for  them  to  return  to 
England  without  suffering  like  persecution  again.  What  then  can  Dr.  Coit 
mean  by  saying  that  "  the  Pilgrims  did  not  sail  for  New  England  because 
they  were  persecuted  ?"  Oh — that  they  were  not  persecuted  in  Holland  !  Dr 
Coit  even  proves  that  they  went  "  of  their  own  free  choice  and  motion." 

And  now  hear  with  what  indignation  he  breaks  forth  upon  the  Plymouth 
Rock  orators,  and  others,  who  pretend  that  the  Pilgrims  were  driven  by  perse- 
cution to  America — "  With  what  sort  of  countenance,  then,  can  an  honest 
chronicler,  or  a  truthful  orator,  look  at  Plymouth  Rock  as  the  first  American 
foothold  for  harried  victims  of  persecution  ?  Why  does  the  cry  rise,  louder 

*  Baylie ;  one  of  Dr.  Coit's  chief  authorities,  a  name  which  figures  largely  through 
his  book  :  but  an  author  whose  mistakes  and  misrepresentations  were  so  thoroughly 
exploded  by  Winslow  and  Cotton  ("  Way  of  the  New  England  Churches")  that, 
for  nearly  two  centuries,  they  have,  by  the  verdict  of  the  world,  been  consigned  to 
a  dishonored  grave.  Dr.  Coit  has  once  more  disinterred  this  mass  of  rottenness, 
and— for  the  benefit  of  the  Church,  and  at  the  call  of  her  bishops  and  clergy, — 
brought  it  forth  in  his  bosom,  as  a  sweet  smelling  savor,  to  the  world 


REVIEW.  431 

if  anything  than  ever,  from  New  England  Societies  ?" — (stand  from  under, 
Leonard  Bacon  !  stand  from  under,  Mr.  Senator  Choate  !) — "  orations,  songs, 
and  dinner  tables.  The  Pilgrims  landed  at  Plymouth,  fugitives,  escaping  for 
actual  life  from  persecution  ?"  "  Shame  upon  such  misrepresentation  !  by  the 
solemn  testimony  of  facts,  and  their  own  lips,  they  did  not !  And  yet  the  cry 
is  undiminished,  and  the  speech,  and  the  lyric,  and  the  feast,  go  their  annual 
round." 

Who  ever  supposed,  or  asserted,  that  the  Pilgrims  were  persecuted  in  Hol- 
land ?  Who  does  not  know  that  they  fled  thither  from  persecution  in  Eng- 
land? Has  anybody,  under  the  wide  canopy  of  heaven,  ever  affirmed,  that 
the  Pilgrims  were  persecuted  in  Holland  ?  How  childish  Dr.  Coil's  cry  of 
shame  ?  What  a  paltering — what  a  childish  paltering — unworthy  of  a  school- 
boy— is  his  solemn  denial  that  the  Pilgrims  "  sailed  for  New  England  because 
they  were  persecuted  ?"  What  a  sheer — inexcusable  misrepresentation  is  that, 
which  charges  orators  and  New  England  Societies  with  affirming  that  the 
Pilgrims  fled  from  persecution  in  Holland  ?  And  last  of  all,  how  supremely 
ridiculous  is  this  "  negative  pregnant"  reason,  why  the  Pilgrims  did  sail  from 
Holland  to  America  ? 

I  cannot  fear  that  Dr.  Coit's  "  facts"  in  this  matter,  or  his  reasons,  will  have 
any  weight  at  all  against  the  straightforward  declarations  of  Bradford  and 
Winslow.  But  I  do  suppose  that  they  may  possibly  create  no  very  favorable 
impressions  as  to  Dr.  Coit's  own  tact  in  logic  and  in  history,  to  say  nothing 
about  the  moral  qualities  which  incapacitate  him  from  appreciating  the  motives 
assigned  by  the  Puritans,  for  leaving  Holland. 

HE   DENIES   THE   SUFFERINGS    OF    THE    PILGRIMS. 

Dr.  Coit  is  in  such  a  humor  of  denying  the  commonly  received  history,  and 
so  bent  not  only  upon  destroying  the  character  of  the  Pilgrims,  but  also  of 
cutting  them  off  from  all  share  in  our  sympathies,  that  he  takes  it  upon  him  to 
deny  their  sufferings  in  New  England.  "  The  current  version  of  their  ro- 
mance" says  he,  p.  137,  "  is,  that  their  sufferings  in  New  England  were  almost 
intolerable."*  This  he  denies  on  the  authority  of  Gorges;  and  adds,  "  This 
account  mars  the  poetry  and  sinks  the  pathos  of  the  scheme  for  leaving  Hol- 
land ;  but  it  is  too  simple,  sensible,  self-consistent,  and  disinterested,  to  be 
otherwise  than  true." — "  Puritan  fancy,  Puritan  rhymes,  Puritan  orators,  and 
Puritan  historians,  may  put  a  fairer  and  more  spiritual  representation  upon 
these  unpoetic  facts,  but  the  plain  unvarnished  statement  of  Gorges  will 
always  look  a  hundred  fold  more  like  the  naked,  natural  truth." 

One  knows  not  which  the  most  to  wonder  at,  the  heartlessness  or  the  brazen 
presumption  with  which  this  denial  of  the  sufferings  of  the  Pilgrims  is  put 

*  "  And  much  poetry  and  rhetoric  too  is  often  wasted  (says  Dr.  Coit,  p.  14), 
upon  the  sufferings  which  the  Puritans  first  endured  from  the  inhospitable  clime 
and  soil  of  young  New  England.  Many  a  sentimental  eye  sees  nothing  but  parched 
corn  upon  their  table,  and  an  avalanche  of  snow  upon  their  roof.  Gorges  admits, 
that  when  they  landed  at  Plymouth,  many  of  them  were  weak  and  feeble.  But  he 
goes  on  to  say, '  they  were  not  many  days  ashore  before  they  had  gotten  both  health 
and  strength.' " 


432 


REVIEW. 


forth.  Why  grant  it,  that  the  very  journals  of  the  Pilgrims  are  unworthy  of 
credit ;  journals  in  which,  in  the  simplest  language,  they  relate  hov;  one  half  their 
number  died  in  the  first  five  months,  "  the  greatest  part  in  the  dead  of  winter, 
when  there  were  not  well  ones  enough  to  tend  the  sick,"  or  scarcely  to  bury 
the  dead: — how  in  subsequent  times,  Winslow  relates — "I  have  seen  strong 
men  stagger  for  want  of  food."  I  say,  even  granting  that  these  Pilgrims  were 
such  liars  that  their  journals  and  letters  are  not  to  be  trusted; — I  would  not 
even  then  forbear  to  cry  out — For  shame  Dr.  Coit ! — Does  not  even  nature 
teach  you,  that  one  hundred  men,  women  and  children,  coming  three  thousand 
miles  over  a  stormy  ocean,  in  one  little  ship  of  one  hundred  and  eighty  tons, 
with  all  their  supplies, — and  supplies  for  the  crew  on  their  return  voyage, — 
and  landing  in  the  depth  of  winter  on  the  shore  of  a  measureless  wilderness, 
absolutely  beyond  the  reach  of  all  human  aid, — without  a  hut,  or  shelter,  or 
hearth — save  such  as  their  scanty  tools  shall  fabricate  out  of  the  materials 
yielded  by  the  forest : — and  that  too  when  they  are  weary  and  wayworn,  and 
many  of  them  entirely  disabled  by  sickness  from  their  first  landing : — does  not 
even  nature  teach  you,  that  their  sufferings  must  be  "  almost  intolerable  ?" 
What  heart  have  you, — for  any  shame,  what  front  have  you,  to  deny  it ;  and 
to  pour  out  upon  people  in  that  condition,  such  unfeeling  ribaldry  about  their 
pretended  sufferings  ? 

"  BROWNISM"  AND  "  UTTER  EXCLUSIVENESS"  OF  THE  PILGRIM  CHURCH. 

On  pp.  38,  39,  Dr.  Coit  labors  with  great  heat,  to  prove  that  the  "  New 
England  Puritans  are  descended" — from  the  Brownists ;"  that  "  Brownists  they 
were  up  to  that  ultimate  hour  of  their  European  existence;" — that  "they 
never  departed  from  one  of  Brown-ism's  worst  peculiarities,  ITS  UTTER  EXCLUSIVE- 
NESS."  "  Like  that  charter,"  says  he,  "  it  fastens  upon  them  as  indelibly  as  the 
brand  of  the  actual  cautery."  Here  he  cites  "  a  Presbyterian  witness,"  in 
these  words :  "  What  tenets  are  held  by  the  Independents  of  New  England  ? 
They  reckon  all  Reformed  churches,  except  themselves,  profane  and  unclean." 
Now,  this,  of  course,  cannot  be  true  of  Higginson,  Winthrop,  and  their  com- 
peers ;  who,  up  to  the  last  hour  of  their  European  existence,  had  never  sepa- 
rated from  the  English  Church.  It  was  Higginson,  who,  standing  on  the  deck  of 
the  ship,  and  taking  his  last  look  of  his  native  land,  said,  "  We  will  not  say, 
as  the  Separatists  were  wont  to  say,  Farewell  Babylon,  farewell  Rome ;  but 
we  will  say,  Farewell  dear  England,  Farewell  the  Church  of  God  in  England." 
"We  do  not  go  to  New  England  as  separatists  from  the  Church  of  England." 
It  was  Winthrop  and  his  company,  who,  in  1630,  in  their  address  "to  the  rest 
of  their  brethren  in  the  Church  of  England,"  used  that  expression  which  Dr. 
Coit  loves  so  frequently  to  quote  ; — they  called  the  Church  of  England  their 
"  Dear  Mother."  These,  therefore,  were  no  Brownists,  in  the  sense  of  separa- 
tion and  exclusiveness,  which  Dr.  Coit  intends.* 

*  Here,  again,  occurs  another  of  Dr.  Coit's  innumerable  perversions.  He  says, 
"  Mr.  Young,  the  compiler  of  the  Chronicles,  knows  well  enough,  that  to  claim 
some  of  the  Puritans  as  his  ecclesiastical  ancestry,  would  be  to  boast  a  pedigree  that 
would  do  him  no  honor.  And  so  he  vainly  enters  the  caveat,  that  the  Plymouth 


REVIEW.  433 

As  to  the  Plymouth  colonists,  the  charge  of  Dr.  Coit,  concerning  their  "  utter 
exclusiveness,"  and  their  "  remaining  Brownists  up  to  the  last  hour  of  their 
European  existence,"  is  utterly  untrue.  Such  a  story  was  early  circulated  by 
the  calumniators  of  the  Leyden  colony,  but  the  colonists  not  only  declared  it 
an  ''aspersion,"  but  by  a  long  array  of  indisputable  facts,  amply  proved  their 
declaration  true.  Says  Gov.  Winslow  (and  he  is  quite  as  good  authority  as 
Dr.  Coit's  "  Presbyterian  witness,"  who  had  no  personal  knowledge  of  the 
facts),  "  Some  say,  the  Church  of  Plymouth,  which  went  first  from  Leyden, 
were  schismatics,  Brownists,  rigid  separatists,  having  Mr.  Robinson  for  their 
pastor,  who  made,  and  to  the  last  professed,  separation  from  other  churches  of 
Christ,  &c.  And  the  rest  of  the  churches  in  New  England,  holding  communion 
with  that  Church,  are  reputed  to  be  such  as  they  are." 

This  Gov.  Winslow  declares  an  "  aspersion."  As  to  Mr.  Robinson,  he  says, 
"  I  living  three  years  under  his  ministry,  before  we  began  the  work  of  planta- 
tion in  New  England,  it  was  always  against  separation  from  any  of  the  churches 
of  Christ ;  professing  and  holding  communion  with  most  of  the  French  and 
Dutch  churches,  yea,  tendering  it  to  the  Scotch  also."* 

"  The  Church  of  Leyden  made  no  schism  or  separation  from  the  Reformed 
churches."  "  As  for  the  Dutch,  it  was  usual  for  our  members  *****  to 
communicate  with  them."  Yea,  at  this  very  instant — Moses  Symonson; 
*****  because  he  is  a  child  of  one  that  was  in  communion  with  the  Dutch 
Church  at  Leyden,  is  admitted  into  church -fellowship  at  Plymouth,  in  New- 
England,  *****  and  other  Dutch,  also  in  communion  at  Salem."  He 
notices  instances,  by  name,  of  individual  members  of  the  French  Churches, 
and  of  the  Walloons,  who  were  received  into  communion  with  the  church  at 
Plymouth,  "  by  virtue  of  communion  of  churches:  "  which  has  continued,  down 
to  the  present  day,  the  universal  practice  of  all  the  Puritan  Churches.  Win- 
slow  further  adduces  the  parting  counsel  of  Mr.  Robinson,  in  which  he  ex- 
horted them  by  "  all  means,  to  avoid  and  shake  off  the  name  of  Brownist,  a 
mere  nickname,  and  brand  to  make  religion  odious."  This  Dr.  Coit,  with  his 
usual  perversion,  endeavors  to  convert  into  a  proof-positive,  that  they  were  at 

Puritans   (alas  for   Boston,  Salem;  and  New   Haven  !)  are   the  ONLY  ONES  who 
merit  the  name  of  Pilgrim.     But  the  demurrer  will  not  save  his  precarious  cause." 

Now,  this  is  said  as  though  Mr.  Young  were  warily  entering  a  caveat,  lest  he 
should  be  considered  as  descended  from  Brownists  ;  and  as  though  Mr.  Young  feared 
that  the  charge  might  lie  against  all,  save  the  Plymouth  colonists, — which  is  in  no 
respect  the  case.  The  Massachusetts  colonists  never  had  been  Brownists,  as  Mr. 
Young  well  knew,  and  as  Dr.  Coit  well  knows,  provided  he  knows  anything  about 
the  subject,  as  he  ought  to  know.  Mr.  Young  has  no  manner  of  reference  to  any 
such  thing  as  Dr.  Coit  pretends  ;  but  is  simply  writing  the  historical  fact,  that  the 
name  "  PILGRIM"  strictly  belongs  to  the  Plymouth  colonists  alone,  as  they  were  the 
only  ones  who  sojourned  in  a  foreign  land  previous  to  their  coming  to  America, 
Dr.  Coit  says,  "  Let  his  claim  be  granted, — the  claim  will  not  save  his  precarious 
cause," — for  (he  argues)  "  even  the  Plymouth  colonists  were  Brownists:" — imply- 
ing that  Mr.  Young's  cause  had  been,  to  save  himself  the  dishonor  of  being  ranked, 
as  a  descendant  of  the  Brownist  colonists  of  Massachusetts ! 

*  In  Young's  Chronicles  of  the  Pilgrims,  p.  387. 
28 


434  REVIEW. 

that  time  Brownists  ;  "  They  are  implored  not  to  be  Brownists,"  says  he.  Mr. 
Robinson  does  not  implore  them  "not.  to  be"  Brownists  (Mr.  Winslow  has 
already  proved  that  they  were  not),  but  "  to  shake  off  the  name,'"  which  their 
enemies  unjustly  put  upon  them. 

VIPERS    FASTENING    ON    APOSTOLIC     HANDS. 

But  Dr.  Coit  here  brings  in  the  Puritans  of  the  present  day,  for  a  share  of 
the  castigation  which  he  is  bestowing  upon  their  fathers.  He  continues 
(p.  39),  "  The  name,  indeed,  of  Brownism  was  abandoned ; — but  its  spirit — 
alas  its  spirit !  even  at  this  distant  day,  do  not  its  vipers  come  out  of  many  a 
heat  to  fasten  on  Apostolic  Hands  ?"  Gentle  reader,  can  you  conjecture  who 
this  Apostle  is,  whose  hands  are,  at  the  present  day,  so  infested  with  vipers  ? 
"  I  here  allude,"  says  Dr.  Coit,  "  among  other  things,  to  the  harsh  assaults 
upon  the  present  Bishop  of  Connecticut,  for  a  charge  delivered,  in  the  ordinary 
course  of  duty,  to  the  clergy  of  his  own  diocese — a  prelate  who  has  meekness 
enough  (if  it  could  be  imputed  to  them)  to  make  amiable  even  the  reviewers  in 
the  testy  New  Englander." 

It  is  time  that  Dr.  Coit  should  know,  that  we  regard  the  "  present  Bishop  of 
Connecticut"  as  no  Apostle.  A  charge  published  to  the  world,  aiming,  by  its  very 
title,  to  assail  the  faith  of  all  other  churches  around  him,  and  applying  to 
them  unsparingly,  the  odious  epithets  of  "  dissenters,"  "  incongruous  sects," 
concerning  whom,  as  compared  with  the  Episcopal  Church,  the  Bishop  says, 
••'  Surrounded  by  all  this  desolation,  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  appears 
as  an  oasis  in  the  desert ;" — a  charge,  perverting  and  misrepresenting  the  doc- 
trines of  the  churches  around  him,  ridiculing  "  the  Bible  alone"  as  a  "  standard 
of  faith,"  and  setting  up  the  interpretations  of  the  Churchy  as  the  only  safe 
authority : — I  say  such  a  charge,  so  published  to  the  world,  cannot  be  deemed 
a  matter  simply  in  the  discharge  of  the  Bishop's  ordinary  duty,  nor  simply  a 
matter  between  him  and  his  Presbyters,  with  which  (as  Dr.  Coit  insinuates) 
nobody  else  has  a  right  to  interfere.  When  the  Bishop  has  put  forth  to  the 
world  these  anti-christian  doctrines  (as  we  deem  them)  concerning  the  rule  of 
faith,  and  made  these  assaults  upon  the  faith  and  order  of  our  churches;  we 
deem  it  no  breach  of  decorum,  or  of  Christian  charity,  to  deal  with  such 
assaults  and  misrepresentations,  as  their  atrocity  deserves.  If  Dr.  Coit,  for 
this,  sees  fit  to  call  us  "  Vipers,"  that  come  out  of  the  heat, "  to  fasten  upon 
Apostolic  hands,"  we  will  conclude  that  he  has  no  better  answer  to  give. 

THE  "  UTTERLY  EXCLUSIVE"  CHURCH 

But  what  is  all  this  to  the  charge  of  "  utter  exclusiveness  ?"  Is  utter  ex- 
clusiveness  such  a  sin  in  Dr.  Coit's  eyes  ?  Does  he  know,  then,  of  a  church, 
which  claims  to  be  "  the  only  true  church,"  which  utterly  refuses  to  acknow- 
ledge any  other  bodies  of  Christians,  as  churches  at  all;  and  which  "  utterly 
excludes,"  and  denounces  all  other  ministers  as  no  ministers,  but  as  sons  of 
4i  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram  ?"  Does  he  know  a  church  one  of  whose  Presby- 
ters recently  put  forth,  with  the  knowledge  and  sanction  of  his  "  meek"  bishop, 
a  tract,  showing  the  impropriety  and  sin  of  Episcopalians  joining  in  commu- 


REVIEW.  435 

nion,  or  attending  public  worship  with  other  denominations  ?  Does  he  know 
of  a  church,  whose  convention,-  with  their  bishop  at  their  head,  not  long 
since,  solemnly  advised  all  churchmen,  where  they  were  too  few  to  maintain 
pnblic  worship  by  themselves,  to  withdraw  from  the  worship  of  other  denomina- 
tions, and  seclude  themselves  in  their  private  households  ?  Does  he  know  of 
any  such  church?  If  not,  let  him  know,  that  there  is  one  church  (denomina- 
tion) in  New  England  (besides  the  Popish),  whose  "  utter  exclusiveness"  entirely 
fulfils  the  description  of  his  "  Presbyterian  witness;" — "  They  reckon  all  Re- 
formed Churches,  except  themselves,  profane  and  unclean."  All  Reformed 
Churches,  I  say:  they  hold  the  Church  of  Rome  as  a  sister,  or  a  mother. 
How  strange  it  would  be,  if  it  should  turn  out  that  Dr.  Coit,  after  all  his  out- 
cry about  "  utter  exclusiveness,"  had  actually  betaken  himself  to  the  embraces 
of  that  very  church  ! 

ACT   OF   UNIFORMITY  AND    ST.    BARTHOLOMEW'S  DAY. 

On  p.  64,  Dr.  Coit  says,  "  The  Act  of  Uniformity— 0  the  Act  of  Unifor- 
mity, consummated  on  that  awful  day  of  the  month,  the  24th  of  August,  when 
the  Huguenots  were  massacred  in  France, — that  direful,  desolating  act,  which 
thrust  two  thousand  '  godly  and  painful'  ministers  from  their  comfortable 
livings,"  &c. — "  Two  thousand  «  godly  and  painful'  ministers  dispossessed  of 
their  livings  ?  Why,  the  Puritans  themselves  dispossessed  probably  ten  thou- 
sand of  the  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England.  These  two  thousand  also, 
•were  interlopers, — not  even  ecclesiastical  squatters,  as  we  Americans  would 
say — absolute  interlopers,  who  had  driven  away  the  lawful  shepherds  of  the 
flock,  and  were  covering  themselves  with  the  fleece  full  warmly.  The  minis- 
ters of  the  Church  of  England  were  the  real  victims  of  banishment ;  and  the 
Act  of  Uniformity  was  but  an  act  of  simple  justice,  to  give  them  back  their  own." 

These  "  facts"  of  Dr.  Coit  need  a  little  sifting.  He  says  the  Puritans  dis- 
possessed probably  ten  thousand  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England.  His 
authority,  "  Walker,"  sets  it  down  in  round  numbers  at  eight  thousand.  In  the 
actual  list  at  the  end  of  his  book  he  makes  out  a  little  more  than  one  fifth  of 
that  number."  Among  his  cathedral  clergy  he  reckons  up  several  prebends, 
and  canonries,  in  which  he  supposes  sufferers  without  any  evidence.  Of  this 
sort  Dr.  Calamy  has  reckoned  above  two  hundred.* 

Where  a  clergyman  was  possessed  of  half  a  dozen  benefices,  more  or  less, 
Walker  reckons  him  as  half  a  dozen  men.  "  For  example,  Richard  Stuart, 
LL.D.,is  set  down  as  a  sufferer  in  the  deanery  of  St.  Paul's,"*  *  "  St.  Pancras 
— both  prebendary  and  residentiary," — "  in  the  deanery  and  prebend  of  the 
third  stall  in  Westminster,*5  "  royal  chapel,"  "  provostship  of  Eton  College," 
and  "  prebend  of  Northalton  in  the  church  of  Salisbury."  So  Richard  Stuart, 
LL.D.,  counts  seven.  Walker's  list  underwent  some  scrutiny  in  its  day.  "  An 
exact  computation,"  made  in  Suffolk,  Norfolk,  and  Cambridgeshire,  in  which 
there  were  1398  parishes,  "  showed  that  there  were  253  sequestrations." 
Similar  examinations  elsewhere  showed  that  Walker's  list  was  greatly  exag- 
gerated. 

*  Neale. 


436  REVIEW. 

Dr.  Coit  says  of  the  Puritan  ministers,  that  they  were  "  absolute  interlopers, 
who  had  driven  away  the  shepherds  of  the  flock."  The  fact  was,  that  the 
ejected  church-clergy  were  such  as  had  been,  by  an  ordinance  of  both  houses 
of  parliament,  upon  trial,  turned  out  of  their  livings  for  being  "  scandalous  in 
their  lives,  ill-affected  to  the  parliament,  fomenters  of  this  unnatural  war,"  or 
for  having  "  deserted  their  cures."  The  "  interlopers"  were  such  as  were 
"  chosen  by  the  parishioners"  and  inducted  into  office  after  careful  examination, 
both  of  character  and  qualifications,  by  the  constituted  tribunals. 

Neale  says  with  regard  to  Walker's  list,  that  "  when  such  were  deducted  as 
were  fairly  convicted  upon  oath  of  immoralities  of  life,  *  *  *  and  all  such  as 
took  part  with  tlie  king  in  the  war,  or  disowned  the  authority  of  parliament ; 
preaching  up  doctrines  inconsistent  with  the  cause  for  which  they  had  taken 
arms,  and  exciting  the  people  to  an  absolute  submission  to  the  authority  of  the 
crown,  the  remainder  that  were  displaced  *  *  *  *  must  be  very  inconsider- 
able."* 

Baxter  says,  "  They  cast  out  the  grosser  sort  of  insufficient  and  scandalous 
clergy,  and  some  few  civil  men  that  had  acted  in  the  wars  for  the  king,  *  *  * 
but  left  in  near  half  of  those  that  were  but  barely  tolerable," — and  that  "  in  all 
the  counties  in  which  he  was  acquainted,  six  to  one,  at  least,  if  not  more,  that 
were  sequestered  by  the  committee,  were,  by  the  oaths  of  witnesses,  proved 
insufficient,  or  scandalous,  or  both." 

Dr.  Coit  says,  "  The  act  of  Uniformity  was  but  an  act  of  simple  justice,  to 
give  them  back  their  own."  An  act  of  simple  justice,  designed  simply  to  give 
ousted  clergymen  their  own,  would  have  turned  out  simply  the  "  interlopers," 
and  simply  restored  the  injured  to  their  rights.  The  act  of  Uniformity  did 
neither ;  and  was  designed  for  no  such  end.  It  made  no  distinction  between 
interlopers  and  such  as  had  been  established  in  the  ministry  before  the  wars. 
It  proceeded  upon  no  such  principle,  but  upon  driving  from  the  ministry  all 
such  as  would  not  observe  an  exact  conformity,  and  subscribe  their  "  unfeigned 
assent  and  consent"  to  everything  contained  in,  and  prescribed  by,  The  Book  of 
Common  Prayer;  or  who  would  not  take  the  oath  of  canonical  obedience, 
abjure  the  solemn  league  and  covenant,  and  declare  their  assent  to  the  doctrines 
of  passive  obedience  and  non-resistance.  The  sufferings  of  the  church -clergy, 
as  says  one  of  their  own  number,  "  were  inflicted  in  a  time  of  tumult  and 
confusion,  so  that  the  plundering  and  ravaging  endured  by  the  church  minis- 
ters, were  owing,  many  of  them  at  least,  to  the  rudeness  of  the  soldiers  and 
the  chances  of  war ;  they  were  plundered,  not  because  they  were  Conformists, 
but  cavaliers,  and  of  the  king's  party." 

Dr.  Coit's  "  interlopers,"  worse  even  than  "  ecclesiastical  squatters,"  were  such 
men  as  Gilpin,  Bates,  Manton,  Jacomb,  Owen,  Goodwin;  Baxter,  Newcomen, 
Calamy,  Pool,  Caryl,  Charnock,  Gouge,  Jenkins,  Corbet,  Mead,  Howe, 
Vincent,  Flavel,  Philip  Henry,  and  others  of  like  character,  though  less  known 
to  fame.  If  the  reader  will  turn  to  the  biography  of  any  in  this  list,  he  will 
observe  that  they  were  not,  even  in  Dr.  Coit's  sense,  "  interlopers"  or  "  squat- 
ters," but,  in  most  cases,  ministers  of  the  most  regular  stamp,  even  before  the 
times  of  the  civil  war.  9 

*  Vol.  ii.}  p.  262.  t  In  Calamy's  Church  and  Dissenter — Neale,  ii.,  p.  263. 


REVIEW.  437 

KING    CHARLES    II. 

Dr.  Coit  not  only  eulogizes  Archbishop  Land,  and  the  Apocrypha,*  but  takes 
into  his  special  protection  the  character  of  Charles  II.  (pp.  37,  54,  and  else- 
where). "  The  same  king"  [Charles  II.]  "  laughed  at,  sneered  at,  and  de- 
nounced as  he  has  been  a  thousand  times,  by  Puritans."  On  p.  37  Dr.  Coit 
says,  referring  to  the  good  deeds  of  Charles  II.,  "  There  may  be  mercy  in  the 
da)r  of  judgment,  for  those  who  could  not  find  it  here."f  Doubtless  this  is  a 
charitable  sentiment ;  bitt  its  design  here,  is  to  raise  some  doubts  in  favor  of 
the  real  character  of  King  Charles  II.  If  Dr.  Coit  means  to  express  a  doubt, 
whether  the  unbelieving  and  profane,  perjurers,  drunkards,  liars,  and  adulterers 
shall  not  inherit  the  Kingdom  of  God,  let  him  know  that  the  word  of  God  is 
decisive  against  such  an  allowance  of  chanty.  Charles  II.  through  his  whole 
life  was  all  that :  given  to  lewdness  and  lying,  an  adulterer,  a  drunkard,  a  per- 
jurer; nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  he  ever  was  reformed,  or  ever  repented.^ 
He  had  thirteen  children  by  his  seven  mistresses,  whom  he  kept  at  different 
times,  to  the  end  of  his  life.  This  was  but  a  part  of  his  irregularities  in  this 
way.  "  He  told  me,"  says  Bishop  Burnet,  that  "  he  could  not  think  God 
would  make  a  man  miserable,  only  for  taking  a  little  pleasure  out  of  the  way.'* 
The  Bishop  adds,  "  He  seemed  to  have  no  sense  of  religion. "§ 

Bishop  Burnet  says,  also,  that  the  "  restoration  of  the  king"  was  followed 
by  "  the  throwing  off  of  the  very  professions  of  virtue  and  piety  :  all  ended 
in  entertainments  and  drunkenness,  which  ran  over  the  three  kingdoms,  ***** 
there  were  great  disorders  and  much  riot  everywhere."*  Says  the  editor  of 
Burnet's  History  of  his  Life  and  Times,  "  If  the  character  of  Charles  II.  had 
to  be  summed  up  in  three  appellations,  they  might  justly  be,  wit,  hypocrite, 
and  profligate."  Living  thus  in  adultery  and  debauchery,  a  scoffer  at  all  re- 
ligion, given  to  profanity  and  lying,  and  withal,  a  prosecutor  unto  blood, — as 
the  "  Tales  of  the  Scottish  Covenanters"  unfold  in  narratives  of  horror,  "  after 
having,"  says  Bishop  Burnet,  "  disguised  his  Popery  to  the  last,  on  his  death 

*  He  quotes  frequently  from  the  Apocrypha,  "  And  moreover,"  says  he,  p.  316, 
"  the  earlier  and  less  rabid  Puritans  always  treated  the  Apocrypha  with  courtesy," 
##*##"  I  may  be  pardoned  for  saying  thus  much  on  this  incidental  matter; 
since  the  use  of  the  Apocyrpha  was,  in  a  Puritan  view,  a  crying  sin  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and  of  the  sternly  Calvinistic  Dutch  Church." 

t  He  gave  Dr.  Owen  a  thousand  guineas  to  distribute  among  those  who  had  suf- 
fered most  by  the  late  severities,  and  yet  his  recompense  was,  to  be  called  "  a  pro- 
fligate tyrant/'  p.  37.  Wonderful  liberality  of  King  Charles  II. !  Just  as  though, 
when  a  villain  has  burnt  my  house,  and  spoiled  my  goods,  and  continues  to  shut 
me  out,  as  far  as  lies  in  his  power,  from  all  means  of  livelihood,  my  neighbors  are 
bound  to  praise  him  for  his  goodness,  because  he  has  once  given  me  a  sixpence  in 
charity. 

t  "  He  could  not  help  letting  himself  out,"  says  Burnet,  "  against  the  liberty,  that, 
under  the  reformation,  all  men  took  of  inquiring  into  matters  of  religion,  for  ... 
they  carried  the  humor  farther,  to  inquire  into  matters  of  state.  He  said  often,  he 
thought  government  was  a  much  safer  and  easier  thing,  where  the  authority  was 
believed  infallible,  and  the  faith  and  submission  of  the  people  was  implicit." 

§  Life  and  Times,  Lond.  Ed.,  1839,  pp.  60,61. 


438  REVIEW. 

bed  he  sent  for  a  Popish  priest  to  give  him  '  absolution  and  extreme  unction.' " 
The  Protestant  Bishop  Ken,  when  the  king  was  in  the  agonies  of  death,  press- 
ed him  to  take  the  sacrament  from  him,  which  the  king  declined.  "  Ken  pressed 
him  to  declare  that  he  died  in  the  communion  of  the  Church  of  England.  To  that 
he  answered  nothing.  Ken  asked  him  if  he  desired  absolution  of  his  sins. 
It  seems  the  king,  if  he  then  thought  anything  at  all,  thought  that  would  do 
him  no  hurt.  So  Ken  pronounced  it  over  him  ;  for  which  he  was  much 
blamed,  since  the  king  expressed  no  sense  of  sorrow  for  his  past  life,  nor 
any  purpose  of  amendment." 

Thus  died  King  Charles  II.,  his  last  care,  and  his  last  words  about  his  mis- 
tresses:  and  there  stood  Bishop  Ken,  presenting  one  of  the.  king's  illegitimate 
children  to  be  blessed  by  him.  Of  his  sins,  of  Christ,  of  eternity,  the  king 
spoke  not,  save  once  he  said  he  "  hoped  he  should  climb  up  to  heaven's  gates  ;" 
"  which,"  says  Bishop  Burnet,  "  was  the  only  word  savoring  of  religion 
that  he  was  heard  to  speak." 

SUFFERINGS    OF   THE    NEW   ENGLAND    CHURCHMEN. 

Dr.  Coit  has  a  chapter  or  two,  about  the  persecutions  suffered  by  the  early 
New  England  Churchmen.  Those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  Episcopal 
claims  of  the  present  day,  will  scarcely  need  history  to  enable  them  to  form 
some  idea  of  the  bearing  of  the  Churchmen  of  those  times,  when  they  could 
look  back  to  the  mother  country,  with  the  hope  that  her  powrer  would  yet  give 
them  the  kingdom  and  the  dominion  here.  The  sentence  which  Dr.  Coit 
quotes  from  Bancroft,  shows  the  views  of  that  historian  on  this  point,  p.  187: 
"  But  now,  the  apparent  purpose  of  advancing  religious  freedom,  was  made  to 
disguise  measures  of  the  deadliest  hostility  to  the  frame  of  civil  government. 
The  Nationality  of  New  England  was  in  danger"  Can  we  wonder  that  those 
who  had  retreated  three  thousand  miles,  to  a  wilderness,  for  the  sake  of  reli- 
gious freedom,  should  be  somewhat  jealous  for  its  preservation  ?  The  Puritans 
justly  feared  that  the  success  of  the  prelatists  would  be  destruction  to  their  own 
civil  and  religious  liberties.  Dr.  Coit  quotes  another  sentence  from  President 
Quincy,  concerning  the  bearing  of  the  Churchmen  (p.  206) :  "  Their  proceed- 
ings indicate  a  spirit  sufficiently  lofty  and  determined;  excluding  from  their 
records  all  recognition  of  the  authorities  of  Massachusetts,  not  even  referring 
to  the  Colony  by  name,  they  laid  hold  of  the  horns  of  the  transatlantic  altar,  and 
placed  their  society  under  the  shadow  of  the  sceptre  of  the  monarch."  Dr. 
Coit  also  quotes  (p.  207),  the  Address  of  the  "  Rector  and  Wardens  of  King's 
Chapel,"  Boston,  sent  to  the  King  in  1691,  in  which  they  speak  of  the  Colonial 
government,  as  "  a  disloyal,  prevailing  party  amongst  us,  who,  under  pretence 
of  the  public  good,  design  nothing  but  ruin  to  us  and  the  whole  country." 

Dr.  Coit  also  has  a  chapter  (p.  260),  on  the  "  Puritanic  Efforts  to  defeat  an 
American  Episcopate."  (Jan  we  wonder  at  this?  The  Churchmen,  on  both 
sides  of  the  water,  were  perpetually  plotting  to  establish  an  Episcopate  over 
these  colonies.  All  parties  well  knew,  that  Lord  Bishops  once  established  here 
under  the  British  government,  would  have  had,  even  by  common  law,  ecclesi- 
astical jurisdiction,  including  all  causes  matrimonial  and  testamentary,  over  the 


REVIEW.  439 

whole  people.  The  question  of  the  establishment  of  an  American  Episcopate 
was  a  question  of  life  or  death  to  all  the  immunities  and  liberties  which  the 
Pilgrims  sought,  in  coming  across  the  ocean.  Can  the  people  be  blamed  for 
looking  to  a  matter  thus  deeply  affecting  their  own  rights,  and  not  simply  per- 
taining to  the  Episcopalians  alone  ?  What  would  not  an  American  Episcopate 
have  done  then,  when,  even  at  this  late  day,  it  claims  "  every  inch  of  the 
ground,"  and  denounces  the  ministers  of  all  other  churches,  as  sons  of  Korah  ? 

PURITANIC    TREATMENT    OF   THE   PRESBYTERIANS. 

On  p.  361,  Dr.  Coit  has  a  chapter  on  the  "  Puritanic  treatment  of  the  Pres- 
byterians." Glancing  over  its  pages,  the  reader  will  observe  its  character  by 
such  expressions  as  these — "  Intolerance  towards  Presbyterianism." — "  Con- 
gregationalism was  as  good  as  its  word.  ...  Its  rival  was  routed  from  the 
land."  Having  raked  up  what  old  offences  were  to  be  found,  Dr.  C.  says 
(p.  390),  "  And  at  last  the  question  came  up  before  me,  can  I  not  put  my  finger 
on  something  which  displays  the  belligerent  aspect  of  Puritanism  and  Presbyterian- 
ism  in  the  times  amid  which  we  actually  live  ?" 

In  great  distress  for  some  hard  thing  to  say,  by  hard  raking,  Dr.  Coit  does  at 
length  find  something,  that,  after  a  sort,  answers  his  purpose.  "  If,  thought  I," 
says  he,  "  the  testimony  I  want,  cannot  be  found  in  the  cross  fire  of  the  Theo- 
logical Review,  .  .  .  and  the  Christian  Spectator,  .  .  .  then,  ...  I  make  a 
strange  guess."  "  To  that  Review  I  went,  and  ....  discovered  a  criticism 
upon  a  volume  which  has  not  escaped  some  comments  of  my  own — the  His- 
torical Discourses  of  Mr.  Leonard  Bacon."  From  this,  Dr.  Coit  proves  indu- 
bitably, "  how  little  love  is  lost  between  the  old  litigants ;  and  how,  in  fact,  the 
breach  has  widened." 

Well,  if  the  breach  has  widened,  the  ancient  breach  could  have  been  no  great 
affair.  Says  Dr.  Coit  again  (p.  374),  "  Many  weakly  suppose  that  Puritanism 
and  Presbyterianism  are  identical.  They  have  yet  to  learn,  and  perhaps  to 
their  cost,  that  genuine  Presbyterianism  has  not  had  a  deadlier  foe." 

Now,  it  is  very  true,  that  in  old  times  there  was  some  foolish  sparring 
between  Congregationalists  and  Presbyterians.  But  since  the  peace,  which 
"  was  patched  up  between  the  Independents  and  Presbyterians  in  England,  in 
1690,  and  their  concordat  adopted  for  all  that  it  was  worth  in  the  Colony  of 
Connecticut,"  as  says  Dr.  Coit  (p.  390),  the  words  of  Cotton  Mather  have 
been  amply  verified  in  the  history  of  the  two  denominations.  The  words  of 
Mather  are  these  :  "  The  brethren  of  the  Presbyterian  way  in  England,  are 
lately  come  into  such  a  happy  union  with  those  of  the  Congregational,  that  all 
former  names  of  distinction  are  lost  in  that  one  of  United  Brethren.  As 
Dr.  Coit  well  knows,  those  "  HEADS  OF  AGREEMENT,  BY  THE  UNITED  MIN- 
ISTERS, FORMERLY  CALLED  PRESBYTERIAN  AND  CONGREGATIONAL,"  Constitute  a 

part  of  our  "  SAYBROOK  PLATFORM."  This  treaty  of  peace  is,  therefore,  one  of 
the  fundamental  laws  of  the  land,  in  our  part  of  what  Dr.  Coit  is  pleased  to 
name  "  PURITANIA," — otherwise  called  New  England.  The  Presbyterians,  so 
far  from  being  "  routed  1  om  the  land"  (New  England),  still  possess  two  entire 
Presbyteries*  within  oui  borders ;  the  descendants  of  the  early  Presbyterian 
*  Londonderry  and  Newburyport. 


440  REVIEW. 

settlers,  who  still  preferred  the  Presbyterian  organization.  Dr.  Coit  should 
remember  that  the  First  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  city  of  New  York  (and  that 
not  long  ago),  was  built  in  no  small  part  by  the  funds  contributed  by  the  Con- 
gregational Churches  of  Connecticut.  He  should  remember  the  Plan  of  Union, 
for  mingling  Presbyterians  and  Congregationalists  in  the  new  settlements.  He 
should  remember,  that  though  one  part  of  the  Presbyterian  body  chooses 
rather  to  dispense  with  that  arrangement,  yet  there  still  subsists  between  them 
and  us,  an  unbroken  harmony,  and  the  most  cordial  esteem.  The  other  parts  of 
the  Presbyterian  family  are  bone  of  our  bone  and  flesh  of  our  flesh.  Our  minis- 
ters and  church  members,  as  Providence  changes  their  habitation,  never  hesi- 
tate reciprocally  to  unite  with  each  other's  churches,  as  though  both  denomina- 
tions were  one.  We  both  have  our  preferences  ;  and  when  occasion  calls,  we 
can  both  manfully  defend  our  peculiarities;  but  our  mutual  toleration,  esteem, 
and  hearty  good-will,  are  unbroken.  God  grant  that  it  may  be  unbroken  for  ever. 
Dr.  Coit  may  cease  his  efforts  in  this  quarter ;  he  will  certainly  lose  his  labor  in 
endeavoring  to  stir  up  a  dissension  between  us  and  our  more  than  neighbors — 
the  Presbyterians. 

But  I  must  bring  this  review  to  a  close ;  not  for  lack  of  materials,  but  from 
dislike  to  the  sort  of  work ;  more  errors  and  misrepresentations  than  I  have 
exposed,  yet  remain ;  but  he  who  would  duly  clear  them  all  away,  the  same 
might  cleanse  the  stables  of  Augeas.  I  close  with  commending  one  or  two 
things  to  the  notice  of  Dr.  Coit's  brethren, 

THE  LOW   CHURCHMEN. 

The  first  is,  to  those  good  evangelical  clergymen,  who,  after  having  done 
good  service,  have  at  length  been  made  Bishops.  What  need  there  may  be,  I 
know  not ;  but  it  may  do  them  no  harm  to  look  in  Dr.  Coit's  glass.  Says  Dr. 
Coit  (p.  382),  "  But  then,  as  was  natural,  these  low-church  Puritans  in  New 
England,  finding  themselves  here  at  the  head  of  affairs  like  a  low  Churchman 
when  made  a  Bishop,  turned  a  somerset,  and  came  up  high  Churchmen  of  the  tall- 
est sort" 

The  second  thing  may  be  especially  commended  to  the  notice  of  the  evan- 
gelical party  in  the  Church,  and  especially  of  that  good  Bishop,  who  not  long 
since  wrote  several  pamphlets  against  Puseyism,  entitled  "  The  Novelties  which 
disturb  our  peace."  The  good  Bishop  will  see  that  his  evangelism  is  the  troubler ; 
and  that  it  bears,  in  Dr.  Coit's  eyes,  a  pretty  close  resemblance  to  Puritanism. 
Says  Dr.  Coit,  after  speaking  of  Tertullian,  and  saying  that  Tertullian  was  no 
doubt  somewhat  Puritanical,  and  was  "  classed"  by  "  the  Catholic  Church 
among  the  heretics," — "  a  pretty  fair  proof  that  Puritanism  was  then,  as  after- 
wards, one  of  the  '  Novelties  which  disturb  our  peace.'  "* 

*  On  p.  276,  Dr.  Coit  has  a  cut  at  the  "  Puritanism"  of  the  excellent  author  of 
u  The  Mysteries  opened."  "  Much  rather,"  says  Dr.  C.,  "  would  I  endure  the  re- 
proaches of  the  New  Englander,  than  enjoy  such  equivocal  praise  as  it  bestows  on 
the  author  of  the  'Mysteries  opened.'  Unblessed  are  all  those  plaudits  which  are 
given  to  one's  intellect,  at  the  expense  of  his  consistency.".  ,  .  .  "A  single  clear 
'  Well  done,'  of  conscience,  is  worth  ten  thousand  of  them."  I  take  this  as  a  pretty 
clear  avowal  that  Puseyism  is  the  only  "  consistent"  Episcopacy. 
^ 


v 

^ 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

TO—  ^      202  Main  Library 

LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling     642-3405. 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 

r**g»r>  t\    A  «ftftfl 

[lir  2  1  w» 



..lionise  DEC  21 

n  r-  r\  1     j     1ftO 

r^ 

DEC!  4  198p 

AUTO.  DISC. 

DEC  01  19|38 

OIROIII  AT! 

ON 

FORM  NO.  DD6, 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 

BERKELEY,  CA  94720 

®$ 

Berkeley 


-    - 


coo4 


Bib 532 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


